Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 23, 2025

Yipit LLC d/b/a YipitData v. Emmett

Judge
John Koeltl
Docket
1:24-cv-07854
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Yipit v. Emmett, Judge Koeltl granted Yipit’s request to seal specified filings and exhibits containing confidential business and customer information.

Who this affects

Yipit LLC d/b/a YipitData, the investor customers whose identifying information Yipit sought to protect, and members of the public seeking access to the specified court records.

What happened

Yipit LLC d/b/a YipitData asked to seal a response, several declarations, and exhibits in Yipit LLC d/b/a YipitData v. Emmett. Yipit said these materials contained sensitive information about its products, prices, data sources, and investor customers.

Yipit also asked to file public versions of some materials with limited redactions and to keep certain exhibits entirely sealed because confidential and public information were closely mixed. The opinion text does not describe any opposition to the request.

The court granted the application. Judge John G. Koeltl’s order therefore allowed the specified materials to be sealed as requested, but the text provided does not give a separate explanation of the court’s reasoning.

The detailed version

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

Case
Yipit LLC d/b/a YipitData v. Emmett · No. 1:24-cv-07854
Judge
John Koeltl
Date
Apr. 23, 2025

Background

Yipit LLC d/b/a YipitData submitted a letter motion asking the court to seal several filings: Yipit’s response to M Science’s sur-reply; declarations by Paul Pasquale, Mary Katherine Kelley, Shangjun Li (Andy Li), Daniel Zellar, and Justin Harkness; Exhibit 1 to Shangjun Li’s declaration; and Exhibits 1 through 4 to Paul Pasquale’s declaration.

Yipit stated that the materials contained highly confidential and competitively sensitive information about its products, pricing, data sources, and business practices. It also said that some materials identified investor customers whose identities should remain confidential. Yipit argued that disclosure could harm its competitive position and the competitive interests of those customers.

Requested Filing Treatment

Yipit said it had publicly filed versions of its response and several declarations with limited redactions. It asked to seal only the portions containing the assertedly sensitive information in those filings. It separately asked to seal the Li and Pasquale exhibits in their entirety, stating that redaction would be difficult and impractical because public and nonpublic information were intertwined.

Ruling

The court’s order states, “APPLICATION GRANTED” and “SO ORDERED.” Judge John G. Koeltl therefore granted Yipit’s application to seal the specified documents and information. The provided text does not include a separate judicial explanation or identify any additional conditions on the sealing order.

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.