IBM Corporation v. Micro Focus, Inc.
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:22-cv-09910
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In IBM Corporation v. Micro Focus (US), Inc., Judge Reznik allowed limited sealing of commercially sensitive filings to protect confidential business interests.
IBM Corporation, Micro Focus (US), Inc., and members of the public seeking access to the specified court filings and exhibits.
What happened
IBM Corporation v. Micro Focus (US), Inc. involved both parties’ requests to keep unredacted filings and exhibits from public view. The parties told the court they did not object to each other’s requests.
The court explained that filed documents are generally presumed open to the public. Sealing must be necessary to protect an important interest and limited to what is needed. The court found that the requested sealing and redactions were narrowly limited to commercially sensitive information and confidential business interests.
Judge Victoria Reznik requested that the Clerk keep the listed filings and exhibits accessible only to selected parties. The opinion did not decide the parties’ underlying dispute.
The detailed version
- IBM Corporation v. Micro Focus, Inc. · No. 7:22-cv-09910
- Vincent Briccetti
- May 31, 2024
Background
The court had recently ruled on Micro Focus’s motion to exclude evidence. When submitting its motion and reply papers, Micro Focus asked to file unredacted versions under seal and to seal certain exhibits. IBM separately asked to file an unredacted opposition and certain exhibits under seal. The parties later submitted a joint letter stating that neither objected to the other’s sealing requests.
Legal standard
The court explained that filed documents carry a presumption of public access. To overcome that presumption, a court must make specific findings that sealing is necessary to protect higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest. The court also noted that courts in the Southern District of New York routinely permit sealing or redaction of commercially sensitive information to protect confidential business and financial interests.
Ruling
After reviewing the proposed sealing requests, the court determined that they were narrowly tailored to seal or redact only commercially sensitive information protecting confidential business interests. The court consequently requested that the Clerk of Court keep ECF Nos. 211, 213, 213-1 through 213-11, 217, 219, 219-1 through 219-21, 222, and 222-1 accessible only to selected parties. This was a sealing and access ruling; the opinion did not resolve the underlying claims between IBM and Micro Focus.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.