United States v. The M/Y Amadea
United States v. The M/Y Amadea, a Motor Yacht Bearing International Maritime Organization No. 1012531, Including All Fixtures, Fittings, Manuals, Stocks, Stores, Inventories, and Each Lifeboat, Tender, and Other Appu
- Ho
- 1:23-cv-09304
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In United States v. The M/Y Amadea, Judge Ho partly granted and denied sealing requests, unsealed some filings, and kept one exhibit sealed.
Eduard Khudainatov and Millemarin Investments, Ltd.; the United States; and members of the public seeking access to the court filings.
What happened
In United States v. The M/Y Amadea, Eduard Khudainatov and Millemarin Investments, Ltd. asked the court to permanently seal several filings connected with their request involving a government safe-passage letter.
The court granted in part and denied in part one request, unsealing the claimants’ letter but keeping the attached safe-passage letter sealed because it contained sensitive information about United States relations with foreign countries. The court denied two other sealing requests and ordered the related letters made public. It also left two previously sealed documents under seal and directed the Clerk to terminate four docket entries.
Judge Dale E. Ho entered the order on January 29, 2025.
The detailed version
- United States v. The M/Y Amadea · No. 1:23-cv-09304
- Ho
- Jan. 29, 2025
Background
Eduard Khudainatov and Millemarin Investments, Ltd., collectively referred to as the Claimants, made several requests to permanently seal documents filed in the case. The documents related in part to the Claimants’ request that the court formally approve a safe-passage letter provided to Mr. Khudainatov by the Government.
Courts generally presume that court filings should be available to the public. The court explained that this presumption can be overcome when public access would harm a higher protected interest, including identified national interests or United States foreign relations.
Rulings on the sealing requests
- ECF No. 328: The request to permanently seal ECF No. 329 was granted in part and denied in part. The court found that the Claimants’ letter, ECF No. 329, did not contain information that could not be disclosed publicly, so it ordered that letter unsealed and made accessible to the public. The court permanently sealed the attached safe-passage letter, ECF No. 329-1, because it contained sensitive information concerning the United States’ relationship with foreign nations. Access to ECF No. 329-1 was limited to the applicable parties. - ECF No. 337: The request to permanently seal ECF No. 338 was denied. The court ordered ECF No. 338, a letter concerning the safe-passage letter, made accessible to the public. - ECF No. 347: The request to permanently seal ECF No. 348 was denied. ECF No. 348 referred to two potential witnesses whose depositions had been the subject of earlier motions. The court noted that discovery had closed, the witnesses had not been deposed, and their identities had become public. The Claimants had not filed a renewed request explaining why public access to their identities should nevertheless be denied.
Other sealed documents and final directions
ECF No. 436 informed the court that the Claimants had filed redacted versions of two documents under seal pursuant to an earlier order. The court stated that ECF Nos. 369 and 389 would remain under seal, with access limited to the applicable parties, for the reasons given in that earlier order.
The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF Nos. 328, 337, 347, and 436. The order was signed by Judge Dale E. Ho on January 29, 2025.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.