Foley v. Union De Banques Arabes Et Francaises
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:22-cv-01682
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Foley v. Union De Banques Arabes Et Francaises, Judge Ramos granted UBAF’s motion to file opposition materials under seal.
UBAF, the plaintiffs, and the customer information contained in UBAF’s opposition materials.
What happened
In Foley v. Union De Banques Arabes Et Francaises, Union de Banques Arabes et Francaises (UBAF) asked to keep its opposition to the plaintiffs’ partial summary-judgment motion and related materials under seal.
UBAF said the materials contained information marked confidential under a protective order and identified, or suggested the identity of, a customer. It also said French law prohibits disclosing client confidences, including customer identities.
Judge Edgardo Ramos granted the motion to file the materials under seal. UBAF was to later file redacted versions publicly after the parties’ briefing was complete, while also filing a redacted-highlighted complete set under seal.
The detailed version
- Foley v. Union De Banques Arabes Et Francaises · No. 1:22-cv-01682
- Edgardo Ramos
- Aug. 4, 2025
Background
Union de Banques Arabes et Francaises (UBAF) asked the court for permission to file several documents under seal: its opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment, its responses to the plaintiffs’ statement of material facts, and supporting declarations and exhibits.
UBAF stated that these materials contained information designated as confidential under a stipulated protective order entered in the case. UBAF also said the materials referred to the identity, or suggested identity, of one of its customers. According to UBAF, French law prohibits disclosing client confidences, including customer identities.
Court’s ruling
The court granted the motion to file the documents under seal. The filing stated that UBAF would file publicly available versions containing redactions within 30 days after briefing on the plaintiffs’ partial summary-judgment motion was complete. UBAF would also file a complete set under seal with the redactions highlighted.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.