In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation
- Katherine Failla
- 1:19-cv-09236
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation: Judge Failla granted plaintiffs’ request to keep a filing and exhibits under seal.
The plaintiffs, the proposed class, the defendants, and the public’s access to docket entry 592 were affected by the sealing order.
What happened
In In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation, the plaintiffs asked to file a letter and attached exhibits under seal temporarily. The materials had been designated confidential or attorneys’ eyes only by the defendants.
The plaintiffs asked to file unsealed versions later, subject to proposed redactions and the court’s prior orders. They did not take a position on whether the defendants’ confidentiality designations were appropriate for this filing.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. She directed the Clerk to keep docket entry 592 under seal, available only to the court and the parties, and to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 591.
The detailed version
- In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation · No. 1:19-cv-09236
- Katherine Failla
- Jan. 24, 2025
Background
The plaintiffs requested permission to file their January 22, 2025 letter and attached exhibits under seal. The letter concerned amended class-certification filings. The defendants had designated the letter and exhibits as confidential or attorneys’ eyes only under an existing confidentiality order.
The plaintiffs stated that they took no position on the defendants’ confidentiality designations for purposes of the filing. They also recognized that confidential business interests must be weighed against the presumption that court records should be publicly accessible. The plaintiffs requested permission to file unsealed copies on January 31, 2025, subject to redactions proposed by the defendants and redactions required by prior court orders.
Ruling
Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. The court directed the Clerk to maintain docket entry 592 under seal, viewable only by the court and the parties. The court also directed the Clerk to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 591.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.