Chenming Holdings Limited v. John Does 1-10

Background

The Servicer Defendants—Sierra Universal Corp., UPC Holdings Ltd., Lviv Estate Holdings Ltd., and C Vanderbilt Management Ltd.—asked the court for permission to redact portions of their memorandum supporting their motion to dismiss Chenming’s Verified Second Amended Complaint. The portions quoted terms from four confidential stock-loan agreements between Chenming and three non-party lenders.

The Servicer Defendants stated that the agreements had been submitted with motions to seal and with a motion to dismiss filed by Jaitegh Singh and Jurist IQ Corp. They argued that the agreements contained confidential financial and non-financial terms, including provisions releasing claims against the Servicer Defendants. They also said the agreements’ confidentiality provisions prohibited public disclosure.

Request and Ruling

The request concerned limited redactions that would conceal specific loan-agreement terms and allow the parties to the agreements to seek a further sealing order. The letter relied on the court’s authority to restrict disclosure when sealing is necessary to protect interests such as competitive harm and the privacy interests of non-parties.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. The Clerk of Court was directed to maintain docket entry 109 under seal, viewable only by the court and the parties. The Clerk was also directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 108. The opinion does not explain the contents of those docket entries beyond these directions.