Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 29, 2025

Deckers Outdoor Corporation v. Next Step Group, Inc.

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:23-cv-02545
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

Deckers Outdoor v. Next Step Group: Judge Figueredo required a showing before permanently sealing exhibits.

Who this affects

Deckers Outdoor Corporation and Next Step Group, Inc.; the ruling concerns Deckers’s request to seal exhibits containing information designated confidential by Next Step.

What happened

In Deckers Outdoor Corporation v. Next Step Group, Inc., Deckers asked to file certain exhibits under seal in connection with an objection to Next Step’s request to continue or postpone an April 30, 2025 hearing.

Deckers sought to seal Exhibit A and an accompanying Exhibit 1 because Next Step had designated the documents as highly confidential, attorneys’-eyes-only, or confidential.

Judge Valerie Figueredo directed Deckers to make the required showing by May 30, 2025, before the documents could be permanently sealed. The opinion does not state a final ruling permanently sealing them.

The detailed version

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

Case
Deckers Outdoor Corporation v. Next Step Group, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-02545
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Apr. 29, 2025

Background

Deckers Outdoor Corporation submitted a letter-motion seeking approval to file a sealed version of Exhibit A and an accompanying Exhibit 1 to its objection to Next Step Group, Inc.’s letter-motion to continue or postpone the April 30, 2025 hearing. Deckers said the documents contained information that Next Step had designated as “Highly Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only” and/or “Confidential.” Deckers requested that the documents be sealed and limited to ex parte viewing.

Court’s Action

Judge Valerie Figueredo directed Deckers to make the showing required by Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006), by May 30, 2025, in order to permanently seal the documents. The opinion does not state that the documents were permanently sealed or describe any additional ruling on the request.

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.