Federal Trade Commission v. PepsiCo, Inc.
- Jesse Furman
- 1:25-cv-00664
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Federal Trade Commission v. PepsiCo, Inc., Judge Furman ordered PepsiCo to justify keeping complaint references sealed.
The Federal Trade Commission and PepsiCo, Inc.; the order also concerns public access to the complaint.
What happened
In Federal Trade Commission v. PepsiCo, Inc., the Federal Trade Commission had permission to file a publicly redacted complaint and an unredacted complaint temporarily under seal.
The Commission said the temporary sealing was meant to give PepsiCo an opportunity to ask for permanent sealing of selected references. If PepsiCo wants the complaint to remain sealed or redacted, it must file a letter no longer than three pages by the deadline for answering the complaint.
Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered PepsiCo to explain why continued sealing would be consistent with the presumption that court documents should be publicly accessible. He also ordered the Commission to serve PepsiCo with the order and file proof of service.
The detailed version
- Federal Trade Commission v. PepsiCo, Inc. · No. 1:25-cv-00664
- Jesse Furman
- Jan. 24, 2025
Background The Federal Trade Commission had previously been allowed to file a complaint with redactions in the public version and to file an unredacted version temporarily under seal. The Commission explained that it sought only temporary relief so PepsiCo could decide whether to request permanent sealing of selected references.
Order The court stated that, if PepsiCo believes the complaint should remain sealed or redacted, PepsiCo must file a letter motion by its deadline to answer the complaint. The letter may not exceed three pages and must explain why continued sealing is consistent with the presumption favoring public access to court documents.
Disposition Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered the Federal Trade Commission to promptly serve PepsiCo with the order and file proof of service. The opinion addresses access to and sealing of the complaint; it does not decide the underlying dispute between the parties.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.