IN RE DIDI GLOBAL INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:21-cv-05807
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In re Didi Global Inc. Securities Litigation: Judge Kaplan granted underwriters’ request to seal confidential exhibits supporting their opposition to a discovery motion.
The Underwriter Defendants and public access to the specified exhibits.
What happened
In In re Didi Global Inc. Securities Litigation, the Underwriter Defendants asked to file certain exhibits under seal while publicly filing their opposition to the plaintiffs’ request to compel discovery with placeholder exhibits. The exhibits included documents produced in discovery and excerpts from depositions of Morgan Stanley and DiDi Global representatives.
The Underwriter Defendants said the exhibits contained confidential or highly restricted information about their due-diligence processes and DiDi’s business. They argued that disclosure could cause competitive harm and that the materials were covered by the case’s confidentiality and protective order.
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan granted the request and ordered the filing under seal.
The detailed version
- IN RE DIDI GLOBAL INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION · No. 1:21-cv-05807
- Lewis Kaplan
- Nov. 22, 2024
Background
The Underwriter Defendants—Goldman Sachs (Asia) L.L.C., Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, BofA Securities Inc., Barclays Capital Inc., China Renaissance Securities (US) Inc., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., HSBC Securities (USA) Inc., UBS Securities LLC, and Mizuho Securities USA LLC—asked the court to approve filing exhibits under seal. The request concerned their opposition to the plaintiffs’ November 19 letter motion seeking responses to the plaintiffs’ first set of document requests.
The Underwriter Defendants planned to publicly file their opposition with placeholder exhibits and file an unredacted version with the exhibits under seal. The exhibits included documents produced during discovery, excerpts from a Morgan Stanley deposition, and excerpts from a DiDi Global deposition. The documents had been designated either “Confidential” or “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” under the parties’ confidentiality stipulation and protective order.
Reason for the Request
The Underwriter Defendants stated that the exhibits contained proprietary and commercially sensitive information about their due-diligence processes, as well as sensitive information about Morgan Stanley, the other underwriters, and DiDi’s business. They asserted that disclosure could cause competitive harm. The letter cited decisions recognizing confidential commercial information and internal business processes as appropriate subjects for sealing.
Ruling
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan granted the request to file the specified exhibits under seal and approved the related public filing with placeholder exhibits. The opinion does not address the merits of the plaintiffs’ discovery motion.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.