IN RE DIDI GLOBAL INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:21-cv-05807
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In re DiDi Global Inc. Securities Litigation: Judge Kaplan addressed proposed sealing and required further showings for permanent sealing.
The plaintiffs, Goldman Sachs, and the parties and counsel identified as having access to the proposed sealed materials.
What happened
In In re DiDi Global Inc. Securities Litigation, the plaintiffs asked to file a class-certification reply with redactions and supporting materials under seal. They said the materials included information Goldman Sachs had marked “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” under a protective order, along with confidential deposition excerpts from lead plaintiff Alaka Holdings Ltd.
The plaintiffs said they planned to publicly file a redacted brief and file an unredacted version and exhibits under seal. They also asked to seal the deposition excerpts and redact quotations from them in the public filing.
The endorsed order directed Goldman Sachs to make the required showing by May 30, 2025, if it wanted the materials permanently sealed, and directed the plaintiffs to make that showing for the deposition excerpts. The order was entered by Judge Lewis Kaplan, according to the supplied case information.
The detailed version
- IN RE DIDI GLOBAL INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION · No. 1:21-cv-05807
- Lewis Kaplan
- Apr. 23, 2025
Background
The plaintiffs, represented by The Rosen Law Firm, filed a request concerning materials supporting their motion for class certification. The request involved an amended reply brief and an amended declaration from Dr. Rajesh Aggarwal. The plaintiffs said some discovery materials had been designated “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” by defendant Goldman Sachs under a confidentiality stipulation and protective order. They also sought to seal excerpts from the deposition of lead plaintiff Alaka Holdings Ltd., which Alaka had designated confidential.
Requested Relief
The plaintiffs proposed publicly filing a redacted version of their reply, with placeholder exhibits, while filing the unredacted reply and exhibits under seal. They also sought to file the amended Aggarwal declaration under seal and to redact from the public brief quotations from the confidential deposition excerpts. The request relied on the protective order, which required confidential or “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” information to be filed under seal absent consent from the party that produced it or a court order allowing otherwise.
Court’s Action
The April 23, 2025 endorsement directed Goldman Sachs to make a showing under Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga by May 30, 2025, if it sought to permanently seal the materials discussed in the request. It also directed the plaintiffs to make a Lugosch showing by that date to permanently seal the deposition excerpts. The text provided does not state that the court permanently sealed any materials or expressly state whether it granted the plaintiffs’ filing request in full. According to the supplied case information, Judge Lewis Kaplan issued the ruling.
Effect
The order established a May 30, 2025 deadline for the parties’ showings concerning permanent sealing. It affected the plaintiffs’ class-certification filings and the confidential materials designated by Goldman Sachs and Alaka Holdings Ltd.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.