been completed, (7) whether any interdepartmental disciplinary proceedings have arisen or may arise from the investigation, (8) whether the plaintiff's suit is non-frivolous and brought in good faith (9) whether the information sought is available through other discovery or from other sources, and (10) the importance of the information sought to the plaintiff’s case. See, Carpet, 181 F.R.D. at 688; see also, Sealed, 856 F.2d. at 272. The considerations are numerous and the privilege is far from absolute. We will not enter in this phase of the analysis because the requirements of the doctrine are not present in this case. 5 . Besides Defendants' argument has been dismissed in the past. See, Atlantic Investment Management, LLC v. Millennium Fund I, Ltd., 212 F.R.D. 395, 397
holding that potential prejudice can be cured by an appropriate iimiting instruction holding that the prejudicial effect of a direct reference to an accuseds failure to testify normally cannot be cured by an instruction to disregard holding that the erroneous failure to hold a pretrial competency hearing can be cured by a meaningful retrospective hearing holding that an attorneys failure to sign a subpoena can be cured holding that lack of jurisdiction cannot be cured by consent