Sportvision, Inc v. MLB Advanced Media L.P.
- Paul Gardephe
- 1:18-cv-03025
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Sportvision v. MLB Advanced Media, Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo granted a motion to permanently seal an expert report containing sensitive business information.
The plaintiffs, MLB Advanced Media, L.P., and members of the public seeking access to the court record. The ruling keeps Exhibit B, a damages expert report containing sensitive business information, sealed.
What happened
Sportvision, Inc. and other plaintiffs are involved in Sportvision, Inc. et al. v. MLB Advanced Media, L.P. The dispute concerns a request to seal Exhibit B to MLB Advanced Media’s objections to an order about partially lifting a stay.
The exhibit is a damages expert’s report. The report contains revenue, pricing, cost, contract, and other sensitive business information involving both sides, including information the plaintiffs have alleged describes trade secrets. MLB Advanced Media argued that this information should remain confidential despite the general public-access interest in court documents.
The motion to seal was granted, and the Clerk was directed to terminate the motion and seal the exhibit. Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo entered the memo endorsement dated January 28, 2025.
The detailed version
- Sportvision, Inc v. MLB Advanced Media L.P. · No. 1:18-cv-03025
- Paul Gardephe
- Jan. 28, 2025
Background
MLB Advanced Media, L.P. asked the court to permanently seal Exhibit B to its objections to a magistrate judge’s order concerning the plaintiffs’ request to partially lift a stay. Exhibit B is a damages expert report prepared by Philip Green, the plaintiffs’ damages expert.
Request to Seal
The report contains sensitive financial information from both the plaintiffs and MLB Advanced Media, including revenue, pricing, and cost data. It also contains contract details and other information that the plaintiffs have alleged describes trade secrets. The report was designated “Highly Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only,” and the documents on which it relies were predominantly given the same designation. The report includes excerpts from those documents.
Legal Standard
The court’s cited standard permits sealing when doing so is essential to protect an important interest and is narrowly tailored to that interest. Courts balance the presumption that the public may access judicial documents against competing interests, including privacy and the protection of confidential business information, trade secrets, revenue information, and pricing information.
Ruling
The motion to seal was granted. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 507 and seal ECF No. 500. Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo entered the memo endorsement on January 28, 2025.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.