Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 21, 2025

Coach IP Holdings, LLC v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:23-cv-10612
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Coach IP Holdings v. ACS Group Acquisition, Judge Figueredo required justification for permanent sealing or the documents would be unsealed.

Who this affects

The parties seeking to keep the documents covered by ECF Nos. 150 and 157 sealed, and the public's access to those documents.

What happened

Coach IP Holdings, LLC v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC involved motions to temporarily keep certain documents confidential. The opinion says no party had requested permanent sealing of the documents covered by those motions.

The court directed any party seeking permanent sealing to file a motion and explain why sealing was justified under the governing standard by March 31, 2025. If no party did so, the documents would be made public. The clerk was also directed to close the two sealing motions administratively.

United States Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo issued the order. It addressed document-sealing procedure and did not decide the parties’ underlying dispute.

The detailed version

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

Case
Coach IP Holdings, LLC v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC · No. 1:23-cv-10612
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Feb. 21, 2025

Background

The parties filed motions seeking provisional, meaning temporary, sealing of certain documents at Electronic Court Filing Nos. 150 and 157. The order states that no party had yet moved to permanently seal the documents covered by those motions.

Order

The court directed any party interested in permanently sealing any of the provisionally sealed documents to file a letter motion to seal by March 31, 2025. The party would also have to make the required showing under Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). If no party filed a letter motion making that showing, the documents would be unsealed. The clerk was directed to terminate the gavels associated with ECF Nos. 150 and 157.

Effect

The order governed whether documents would remain sealed; it did not resolve the underlying claims or defenses. Judge Valerie Figueredo entered the order as a United States Magistrate Judge.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.