A&E Television Networks, LLC v. Big Fish Entertainment, LLC
- Katherine Failla
- 1:22-cv-07411
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In A&E Television Networks v. Big Fish Entertainment, Judge Failla granted defendants’ sealing application, sealed specified exhibits, unsealed others, and terminated the pending motion.
The order affected the parties and non-parties whose confidential business, financial, contractual, third-party, or deposition materials were included in the exhibits to docket entry 144, as well as the public’s access to those exhibits.
What happened
A&E Television Networks, LLC v. Big Fish Entertainment, LLC involved defendants’ request to seal or redact exhibits submitted with their summary-judgment motion. The request concerned business, financial, contractual, third-party, and other information designated confidential by A&E Television Networks.
The court granted the application. It ordered the clerk to keep specified exhibits to docket entry 144 under seal and to unseal other specified exhibits. The court also directed the clerk to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 137.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla entered the order on October 17, 2024. The order addressed access to exhibits and did not decide the parties’ underlying summary-judgment dispute.
The detailed version
- A&E Television Networks, LLC v. Big Fish Entertainment, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-07411
- Katherine Failla
- Oct. 17, 2024
Background
Defendants requested permission to redact or file under seal exhibits submitted with their October 9, 2024 motion for summary judgment. Their letter motion identified several categories of information: competitively sensitive contract terms and negotiations; sensitive financial and business information; proprietary third-party data, including Nielsen ratings data; materials designated Confidential or Highly Confidential by A&E Television Networks under the protective order; and deposition testimony not cited in the summary-judgment briefing or statements of material facts. Defendants argued that public disclosure could cause competitive harm to defendants and non-parties.
Ruling
The court granted the application. It directed the clerk to continue maintaining exhibits 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10–14, 16–40, 42–44, 48, 51, 54–58, 61, 74, and 75 to docket entry 144 under seal. It directed the clerk to unseal exhibits 7, 9, 15, 45–47, 49, 50, 52, 53, and 59–73, 76–78. The court further directed the clerk to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 137.
Effect of the Order
This was an order about sealing and access to court exhibits. It did not rule on the underlying claims or on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The order was signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla and dated October 17, 2024.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.