Jane Street Group, LLC v. Millennium Management LLC
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:24-cv-02783
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Jane Street v. Millennium, Judge Engelmayer authorized defendants to provisionally file an opposition under seal while the parties discussed redactions.
Millennium Management LLC, Douglas Schadewald, and Daniel Spottiswood received permission to file their opposition provisionally under seal; Jane Street Group, LLC and the public may be affected by the later redaction and public-filing process.
What happened
Jane Street Group sued Millennium Management, Douglas Schadewald, and Daniel Spottiswood. The defendants asked to file under seal their opposition to Jane Street’s motion challenging certain amended defenses. They said the opposition should ultimately be public because it did not contain trade secrets or highly confidential business information.
The defendants requested temporary sealing because Jane Street had pending requests to seal parts of the complaint and other filings containing some of the defenses at issue. They proposed meeting with Jane Street about any necessary redactions and filing a public version by June 28, 2024. The court approved the request to provisionally file the opposition under seal.
The order concerns filing access and confidentiality, not the merits of the parties’ underlying dispute. Judge Paul A. Engelmayer entered the order on June 27, 2024.
The detailed version
- Jane Street Group, LLC v. Millennium Management LLC · No. 1:24-cv-02783
- Paul Engelmayer
- June 27, 2024
Background
The defendants—Millennium Management LLC, Douglas Schadewald, and Daniel Spottiswood—asked the court for permission to file under seal their memorandum opposing Jane Street’s motion to strike certain amended affirmative defenses. Filing under seal temporarily restricts public access to a court filing.
The defendants stated that they believed the opposition should ultimately be public because it did not contain trade secrets or other highly confidential business information sufficient to overcome the presumption of public access. They nevertheless sought provisional sealing because Jane Street had pending motions to seal portions of the amended complaint and portions of Millennium’s counterclaims and amended answer, which included some of the affirmative defenses at issue.
Ruling
The filing is marked “SO ORDERED,” and the order authorized the defendants to provisionally file their opposition under seal. The defendants said they would meet and confer with Jane Street about proposed redactions and file a public version by the close of business on June 28, 2024. The text does not include a separate explanation of the court’s reasoning or specify any permanent sealing ruling.
Effect
This was an ancillary filing-access ruling. It did not decide Jane Street’s motion to strike, the validity of the amended affirmative defenses, or the merits of the underlying dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.