IN RE DIDI GLOBAL INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:21-cv-05807
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In re DiDi Global Securities Litigation: Judge Figueredo granted DiDi’s request to seal a redacted expert report containing commercially sensitive information.
DiDi Global Inc., the Underwriter Defendants, and other parties whose confidential information appears in the expert report are affected by the continued sealing and viewing restrictions.
What happened
In In re DiDi Global Inc. Securities Litigation, DiDi Global Inc. asked to file a redacted rebuttal expert report under seal. The report concerned expert testimony and documents covered by a confidentiality order.
DiDi said the report included commercially sensitive information about stabilizing transactions, including a stabilizing agent’s practices and Morgan Stanley’s trading strategies. It also said disclosure could harm DiDi and the Underwriter Defendants competitively.
Judge Valerie Figueredo granted the motion to seal. She directed the Clerk of Court to keep the viewing restrictions on the report at ECF No. 378-2 and to terminate the motion at ECF No. 509.
The detailed version
- IN RE DIDI GLOBAL INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION · No. 1:21-cv-05807
- Lewis Kaplan
- Aug. 4, 2025
Background
DiDi Global Inc. moved to file under seal a redacted version of the rebuttal expert report of Terrence Hendershott. The report had previously been docketed at ECF No. 378-2. DiDi said the report contained sensitive information about the report and deposition testimony of Professor Rajesh Aggarwal, as well as documents produced in the case that were subject to confidentiality restrictions under the parties’ protective order.
Reasons Given for Sealing
DiDi argued that disclosure could cause competitive harm, including harm to the Underwriter Defendants whose confidential information was discussed in the report. It also pointed to a prior ruling that allowed documents concerning stabilizing transactions to remain under seal. According to DiDi, those materials could reveal a stabilizing agent’s strategies and practices and Morgan Stanley’s trading strategies.
The letter described the legal standard requiring sealing to be narrowly tailored and consistent with the public’s presumptive right to access court records. It argued that protecting confidential, competitively sensitive business information justified the proposed redactions.
Ruling
Judge Valerie Figueredo granted the motion to seal. The Clerk of Court was directed to maintain the viewing restrictions at ECF No. 378-2 and terminate the motion at ECF No. 509. The order addressed access to the expert report and did not decide the underlying securities-litigation claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.