Fitzpatrick v. Roadget Business Pte. Ltd.

Background

Jennifer Fitzpatrick, through counsel, sued Roadget Business Pte. Ltd., Shein Distribution Corporation, Shein US Services, LLC, and Fashion Choice Pte. Ltd. She sought permission to file in redacted form a letter motion requesting an extension of the discovery deadline and an adjournment of the settlement conference.

The letter motion discussed the deposition testimony of the defendants’ designated representative under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6), Tim Wei. The defendants had designated the transcript “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” under the parties’ protective order. Fitzpatrick disputed that the entire transcript contained particularly sensitive business or personal information, but asked to use redactions while the parties discussed whether the designation should be removed.

Request and Rationale

Fitzpatrick stated that the proposed redactions were limited to testimony covered by the defendants’ designation. She argued that this approach would preserve most of the public’s access to the filing while protecting the defendants’ asserted privacy interests.

Ruling

The court temporarily granted the application to file the letter motion in redacted form. The court did not decide whether the redactions should remain permanently. If the defendants believed that any redactions should be permanent, they had to file a letter motion by January 7, 2025. If they did not, the court would unseal the letter in unredacted form without further notice. Judge Jesse Furman also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF No. 73.