Rowe v. Google LLC
- Rearden
- 1:19-cv-08655
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Rowe v. Google LLC, Judge Rearden ordered ECF No. 406 maintained under seal, addressing Google’s request to redact customer and nonparty employee information.
Google LLC, Ulku Rowe, Google Cloud customers and clients identified in the filing, and three former Google employees who are not parties to the case.
What happened
Rowe v. Google LLC concerns Google’s request to file an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission position statement in redacted form. Google sought to keep confidential the identities of current and potential Google Cloud customers and clients and three former Google employees who are not parties to the case.
Google said disclosure of customer and client identities could cause competitive harm and that information about the former employees was unrelated to Rowe’s claims and implicated their privacy. The opinion says Ulku Rowe consented to Google’s request.
Judge Jennifer H. Rearden directed the Clerk of Court to maintain ECF No. 406 under seal and terminate the related filing. The available text does not separately state whether the request for permission to file the document in redacted form was granted.
The detailed version
- Rowe v. Google LLC · No. 1:19-cv-08655
- Rearden
- Apr. 16, 2025
Background
Google asked the court for permission to file an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission position statement in redacted form. The position statement was attached to Google’s response to Ulku Rowe’s letter supplementing her motion for relief after judgment. The opinion identifies the position statement as ECF No. 406 and says that Rowe consented to Google’s request.
Requested Redactions
Google sought to redact the identities of current and potential Google Cloud customers and clients. Google stated that this information generally was not shared outside Google without the customer’s or client’s permission and that public disclosure could place Google at a competitive disadvantage in the cloud marketplace.
Google also sought to redact the identities of three former Google employees who are not parties to the case. The position statement discussed their work performance to provide context about Patricia Florissi’s evaluation of her direct reports. Google said the three employees had nothing directly to do with Rowe’s claims.
Court’s Action
Judge Jennifer H. Rearden directed the Clerk of Court to maintain ECF No. 406 under seal and terminate the related filing. The available text does not expressly state that the court granted Google permission to file the position statement in redacted form, although the sealing direction is the stated action in the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.