Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 7, 2025

IN RE DIDI GLOBAL INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION

Judge
Lewis Kaplan
Docket
1:21-cv-05807
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureSecurities
In one sentence

In re DiDi Global Securities Litigation: Magistrate Judge Figueredo granted sealing motions and ordered public redacted versions of two filings.

Who this affects

The parties whose documents were subject to the sealing motions, and members of the public seeking access to the specified court filings.

What happened

In In re DiDi Global Inc. Securities Litigation, the parties asked the court to keep certain documents from public view.

The court granted the motions to seal at ECF Nos. 262, 321, 344, and 376. It also directed the parties to file public versions with proposed redactions for documents at ECF Nos. 355-2 and 378-2 by August 1, 2025.

Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo directed the clerk to terminate the sealing motions and maintain the existing viewing restrictions on specified documents.

The detailed version

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

Case
IN RE DIDI GLOBAL INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION · No. 1:21-cv-05807
Judge
Lewis Kaplan
Date
July 7, 2025

Ruling

The court reviewed the parties’ motions to seal at ECF Nos. 262, 321, 344, and 376. It found that sealing the subject documents was warranted under Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga for the reasons stated in the parties’ motions. The court therefore granted those motions to seal.

For documents filed at ECF Nos. 355-2 and 378-2, the court directed the parties to file public versions with proposed redactions by August 1, 2025. The order cited Lugosch for the requirement that requests to keep court records from public view be narrowly tailored.

Clerk’s Directions

The clerk was directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 262, 321, 344, and 376, and to maintain the existing viewing restrictions at ECF Nos. 263, 264, 322, 345, 346, 377, and 378.

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.