Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 9, 2025

Nielsen Consumer LLC v. Circana Group, L.P.

Judge
James Oetken
Docket
1:22-cv-03235
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Nielsen Consumer LLC v. Circana Group, Judge Parker granted Circana’s motion to seal narrowly tailored redactions and exhibits protecting confidential business information.

Who this affects

Circana Group, L.P.’s response and Exhibits A through D, including the document at ECF No. 426 that the Clerk was directed to keep under seal.

What happened

Nielsen Consumer LLC v. Circana Group, L.P. involved Circana’s request to file a redacted response and seal Exhibits A through D. Circana said the materials contained competitively sensitive business information and confidential documents and communications produced in the case.

The court found that the proposed redactions were narrowly tailored to protect confidential and competitive business information. It also found them consistent with the required standard for sealing court records.

Judge Katharine H. Parker granted Circana’s motion to seal. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion and keep Exhibit D under seal.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Nielsen Consumer LLC v. Circana Group, L.P. · No. 1:22-cv-03235
Judge
James Oetken
Date
Jan. 9, 2025

Background

Circana Group, L.P. asked to file a redacted version of its response to Nielsen Consumer LLC’s request for permission to amend its complaint. Circana also asked the court to file Exhibits A through D under seal. Circana identified nonpublic, competitively sensitive information about data it licensed under the parties’ agreement, along with information in confidential documents and communications produced during the litigation.

Court’s analysis

The court reviewed Circana’s filings and found that the proposed redactions were narrowly tailored to protect confidential and competitive business information. The court found that the request met the standard from Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, which allows sealing when closure is essential to protect a higher value and is narrowly tailored to that purpose.

Disposition

Judge Katharine H. Parker granted Circana’s Letter Motion to Seal. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 424 and keep the document at ECF No. 426 under seal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.