Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 13, 2024

NCR Voyix Corporation v. Embarcadero Technologies Europe Limited

Judge
John Koeltl
Docket
1:24-cv-04458
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In NCR Voyix v. Embarcadero Technologies Europe, Judge Koeltl granted NCR’s application to seal a settlement agreement.

Who this affects

NCR Voyix Corporation and Embarcadero Technologies Europe Limited, as well as members of the public seeking access to the settlement agreement and the specified financial information.

What happened

NCR Voyix Corporation sued Embarcadero Technologies Europe Limited for allegedly breaching a settlement agreement. NCR said Embarcadero had threatened to deactivate software access that the agreement required it to keep available.

NCR asked to file the entire March 31, 2023, settlement agreement under seal. Alternatively, it asked to redact the payment amount, Embarcadero’s bank-account number, and pricing information for new software licenses.

Judge John G. Koeltl granted NCR’s application. The opinion text does not separately explain whether the ruling covered the entire agreement, the proposed redactions, or both.

The detailed version

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

Case
NCR Voyix Corporation v. Embarcadero Technologies Europe Limited · No. 1:24-cv-04458
Judge
John Koeltl
Date
June 13, 2024

Background

NCR filed an action alleging that Embarcadero breached a March 31, 2023, settlement agreement. According to NCR’s filing, the agreement required Embarcadero to allow NCR continued access to software that NCR had licensed from Embarcadero. NCR said Embarcadero had threatened to deactivate that access and that NCR was preparing an emergency request for a temporary restraining order.

Sealing request

NCR asked for permission to file the settlement agreement under seal, meaning outside the public record. As an alternative, NCR asked to redact three categories of information: the amount NCR paid Embarcadero for releases, Embarcadero’s bank-account number, and pricing data for new licenses. NCR relied on the agreement’s confidentiality provision and argued that the financial information was not publicly available. NCR had filed a copy with proposed redactions highlighted and had not yet conferred with Embarcadero because it was preparing the emergency request.

Ruling

The court marked the application “GRANTED” and “SO ORDERED.” Judge John G. Koeltl’s order, as presented in the opinion text, does not separately state whether the ruling authorized sealing the entire settlement agreement, the proposed redactions, or both. The text does not decide NCR’s underlying breach claim or its requested temporary restraining order.

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.