Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 3, 2024

Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Hui Qin

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:24-cv-02219
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Hui Qin, Judge Failla granted the YouYork Defendants’ request to seal two docket entries.

Who this affects

The YouYork Defendants, the other parties, the court, and members of the public seeking access to docket entries 142 and 144.

What happened

Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Hui Qin concerns the YouYork Defendants’ request to file their motion-to-dismiss memorandum with redactions.

The defendants said the memorandum referred to confidential discovery materials containing sensitive financial and personal information. They asked the court to protect that information under a protective order and the court’s filing rules.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. She ordered docket entries 142 and 144 kept under seal, viewable only by the court and the parties, and directed the clerk to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 140.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Hui Qin · No. 1:24-cv-02219
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
June 3, 2024

Background

The YouYork Defendants—YouYork Management LLC, New Land Capital LLC, Golden Land Funds, Inc. (identified in the letter as improperly pleaded as Golden Land Funds LLC), and Hangyuan Zhang—asked for permission to file their memorandum supporting a motion to dismiss with redactions. The request cited the court’s individual rules and a stipulated protective order.

The Request

The defendants stated that the memorandum referred to information in the complaint that came from discovery materials marked confidential. According to the request, those materials included sensitive financial and personal information. The defendants argued that protecting confidential business and financial information justified redacting the memorandum despite the general presumption that court filings are publicly accessible.

Ruling

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. The clerk was directed to maintain docket entries 142 and 144 under seal, with access limited to the court and the parties. The clerk was also directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 140.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.