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

Panini America, Inc. v. Fanatics, Inc

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-09714
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Panini America v. Fanatics, Judge Figueredo granted Panini’s motion to seal documents containing confidential contract terms and sensitive business communications.

Who this affects

Panini and the other parties to the case, because the order permits specified documents and information concerning a production services agreement to remain under seal.

What happened

In Panini America, Inc. v. Fanatics, Inc., Panini asked to file an unredacted letter response and five attached letters under seal. The materials concerned a production services agreement between Panini and its trading-card manufacturer, GCP.

Panini said the agreement was confidential and that the letters contained confidential contract terms and sensitive business communications. Panini also asked to redact limited sensitive business information from the letter response and filed a redacted version publicly.

Judge Valerie Figueredo granted the motion to seal. The court relied on the documents’ confidential contract terms and sensitive business communications.

The detailed version

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

Case
Panini America, Inc. v. Fanatics, Inc · No. 1:23-cv-09714
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
May 21, 2025

Background

Panini entities requested permission to file under seal an unredacted version of their letter response to ECF No. 131 and five letters attached to that response. The letters concerned a dispute arising from a production services agreement between Panini and its trading-card manufacturer, GCP. The parties to that agreement had agreed to treat it as confidential.

Request to Seal

Panini stated that the five letters referred to confidential terms of the production services agreement and contained sensitive business communications. Panini also said that its letter response contained limited sensitive business communications related to the agreement and requested permission to redact that material. Panini filed a redacted version of the letter response publicly and submitted the proposed sealed documents through the court’s electronic filing system.

Ruling

Judge Valerie Figueredo granted the motion to seal. The court stated that the exhibits referred to confidential terms of the production services agreement and contained sensitive business communications. The provided opinion text ends during the court’s discussion of supporting authorities.

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.