Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 7, 2025

GMO Gamecenter USA, Inc. v. Whinstone US, Inc.

Judge
John Cronan
Docket
1:22-cv-05974
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In GMO Gamecenter v. Whinstone, Judge Parker granted the parties’ motion to seal pricing information and redact related descriptions from a discovery letter.

Who this affects

The parties and the public’s access to Exhibit B and the related portions of the discovery letter.

What happened

GMO Gamecenter USA, Inc. and GMO Internet, Inc. jointly sought to seal an exhibit filed in support of a discovery-related letter and to redact parts of the letter describing that exhibit.

The exhibit contained a detailed analysis of different pricing scenarios for Whinstone customers’ hosting agreements. The court found that sealing the exhibit and redacting the related portions of the letter satisfied the required standard for restricting public access to court records.

Judge Katharine H. Parker granted the motion to seal and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the two listed motions.

The detailed version

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

Case
GMO Gamecenter USA, Inc. v. Whinstone US, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-05974
Judge
John Cronan
Date
Feb. 7, 2025

Background

On January 31, 2025, the parties jointly moved to seal an exhibit submitted with a discovery-related letter and to redact portions of that letter describing the exhibit. The motion sought to seal Exhibit B in the plaintiffs’ filing at ECF No. 262 and to redact related portions of the filing.

Court’s Analysis

The court reviewed the parties’ filings and found that Exhibit B contained a detailed analysis of different pricing scenarios for Whinstone customers’ hosting agreements. Applying the standard described in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, the court determined that sealing Exhibit B and redacting the portions of the plaintiffs’ letter describing it were justified and narrowly tailored to protect the stated interest.

Ruling

Judge Katharine H. Parker granted the plaintiffs’ motion to seal. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 260 and 261.

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.