Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 28, 2025

Shunock v. Apple, Inc.

Judge
Rochon
Docket
1:23-cv-08598
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In Shunock v. Apple, Judge Rochon granted Apple's request to seal limited presentation slides containing confidential design information and ordered public and sealed filings.

Who this affects

Apple Inc.'s specified confidential design information will remain unavailable to the public, while the rest of the presentation must be publicly filed. The parties must also file an unredacted version under seal.

What happened

In Shunock v. Apple Inc., Apple asked the court to keep three slides, and parts of another slide, from a presentation about a claim-construction hearing under seal. Apple said the slides showed confidential early designs for its Activity rings, while Shunock took no position on the request.

The court found that the requested redactions were narrowly limited and that Apple's interest in protecting confidential business information outweighed the public's common-law right to access the documents. The slides were not relevant to the court's claim-construction decision.

Judge Jennifer L. Rochon granted the request. The parties must file a publicly available redacted version of the presentation and an unredacted version under seal, with the redactions highlighted.

The detailed version

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

Case
Shunock v. Apple, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-08598
Judge
Rochon
Date
Jan. 28, 2025

Background

Apple submitted a letter responding to the court's direction concerning the sealing of Shunock's presentation slides from a claim-construction hearing. Apple agreed that most of the presentation contained no confidential information and should be made public. It asked to keep slides 43 and 44, and portions of slide 45, under seal.

Apple stated that those slides contained early design iterations for its Activity rings and confidential information about its design process. Apple argued that the slides were not relevant to the court's claim-construction decision and had not been cited or discussed in that decision. Shunock informed Apple that he would take no position on whether the slides should remain sealed.

Court's Analysis

The court applied the common-law right of public access to court documents. It found that the proposed redactions were sufficiently narrow to balance that right against Apple's countervailing interest in protecting confidential business information.

Ruling

Judge Jennifer L. Rochon granted Apple's request to seal the specified portions of the presentation. The parties were ordered to file both a publicly available redacted version of the presentation and an unredacted version under seal, with the redactions highlighted.

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.