does not come close to carrying its burden. [Doc. 1 at 4 (emphasis added) ]. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are not required to demonstrate a substantial need for the documents that cannot be satisfied by obtaining the information from other sources. And Plaintiffs have agreed to a confidentiality provision that treats all documents as protected excepting those documents that, because they are provided to HUD, are public records. See, e.g., DatCard Sys., Inc., 2011 WL 2491515, at *2 (as to the claim that production of the documents would require disclosure of highly sensitive proprietary information, the court found the claim “unfounded in light of the Protective Order in the underlying case”); Ford Motor Co. v. Edgewood Properties, Inc., 2010 WL 4687820, at *4 (D.N.J. November 10, 2010) (<HOLDING>); Medical Technology, Inc., v. Breg, Inc., 2010
recognizing that there is an important privacy interest in corporate financial documents the court agrees that the information can be protected therefore the court  required that the information be disclosed pursuant to a confidentiality order only to be used in connection with this litigation recognizing that information disclosed in private is not a public disclosure under the fca holding party seeking disqualification waives attorneyclient privilege as to the court so the court may assess the contents of allegedly confidential information and the party may present the information either in a hearing out of the presence of the party against whom confidentiality is to be protected or in camera inspection recognizing limits on an individuals right to privacy and requiring the government to move a compelling interest only if there will be disclosure of protected information recognizing that the purpose is to afford  full information in connection with the estate  in order that the necessary steps may be taken for its preservation