XYZ Corp. v. Individuals
XYZ Corp. v. Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unicorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A to the Complaint
- Louis Stanton
- 1:24-cv-04428
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In XYZ Corp. v. Individuals, Judge Torres allowed temporary anonymity and redacted and sealed filings while directing the case’s opening and closure.
XYZ Corp., the unidentified individuals and entities listed on Schedule A, Etsy, Inc., the financial institutions identified in the restraining-order application, and public access to the case filings.
What happened
In XYZ Corp. v. Individuals, XYZ Corp. asked to proceed temporarily under a joint pseudonym, file a redacted complaint, and seal its request for a temporary restraining order and related documents.
The court granted temporary use of the name “XYZ Corp.” and allowed redacted public filings and unredacted sealed filings. The anonymity and sealing of the restraining-order materials will continue until the request is granted, served on Etsy, Inc. and the financial institutions, and carried out. The Clerk was directed to open a new civil case and close the miscellaneous case after the filing requirements are met.
Judge Analisa Torres issued the order on June 4, 2024. The order did not decide whether to grant the requested temporary restraining order.
The detailed version
- XYZ Corp. v. Individuals · No. 1:24-cv-04428
- Louis Stanton
- Aug. 6, 2024
Background
XYZ Corp. filed an application seeking permission to proceed temporarily under a joint pseudonym, submit a redacted complaint and related documents, and file under seal an ex parte request for a temporary restraining order and other relief. The order refers to Etsy, Inc. and financial institutions identified in the restraining-order application.
Court’s Rulings
The court found sufficient cause under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(d) and (e). It granted XYZ Corp.’s motion to proceed temporarily under the pseudonym “XYZ Corp.” The plaintiff may use that pseudonym until the temporary restraining-order application is granted, served on Etsy, Inc. and the financial institutions, and the order’s terms are carried out by those entities.
The court also allowed the public filing of a redacted complaint, a redacted Schedule A, a redacted Exhibit A, a redacted Civil Cover Sheet, and a redacted copyright-related report. Unredacted versions were to be filed under seal in paper form. The court directed the parties to follow the sealing procedures in the court’s electronic filing rules and to present the case-initiating documents to the Clerk in paper form.
After the filing requirements were met, the plaintiff could electronically file the temporary-restraining-order application, which was to remain sealed until the conditions stated in the order occurred. The application, supporting declaration, and attached exhibits were also ordered to remain sealed. The Clerk was directed to open a new civil case under the caption naming XYZ Corp. as plaintiff and the Schedule A entities as defendants, and then to close the miscellaneous case.
What the Order Did Not Decide
The order addressed anonymity, redaction, sealing, and case-opening procedures. It did not rule on the merits of the claims or grant the requested temporary restraining order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.