IN RE DIDI GLOBAL INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:21-cv-05807
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In re Didi Global Securities Litigation, Judge Kaplan received plaintiffs’ request to file certain materials under seal, but the provided text shows no ruling.
The plaintiffs, defendants, and their counsel identified in the appendix would be affected by access to the materials; the requested sealing would also limit public access to those court-filed materials.
What happened
In In re Didi Global Inc. Securities Litigation, the plaintiffs asked permission to file an unredacted response to defendants’ objection to a recommendation about class certification under seal.
The plaintiffs said the case’s protective order required filing the materials under seal because Didi Global Inc. had labeled them confidential or for attorneys’ eyes only. They did not agree that sealing was proper and stated that the defendants would have to justify keeping court records from the public.
The provided text does not show a ruling on the request. The document is addressed to Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, but it does not state that he granted or denied the request.
The detailed version
- IN RE DIDI GLOBAL INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION · No. 1:21-cv-05807
- Lewis Kaplan
- Aug. 5, 2025
Request
Plaintiffs’ counsel asked the court for permission to file unredacted versions of the plaintiffs’ response to defendants’ objection to the report and recommendation concerning class certification under seal. The request cited the confidentiality stipulation and protective order entered on May 22, 2024, and a local electronic-filing rule.
Parties’ positions
The plaintiffs stated that the protective order required them to file the materials under seal unless DiDi consented or the court ordered otherwise. They said DiDi had designated the materials as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” The plaintiffs expressly did not concede that those designations were proper or that the materials should remain sealed. They also argued that the party seeking to seal court documents bears that burden and that judicial records are generally presumed to be accessible to the public.
The letter identified Lead Plaintiff Alaka Holdings Ltd. and named plaintiffs Shereen El-Nahas, Daniil Alimov, Bosco Wang, and Njal Larson. Its appendix listed the defendants, plaintiffs, and their counsel who would be permitted to access the sealed documents.
Disposition
The provided text contains the plaintiffs’ request and supporting discussion but does not state whether the court granted or denied permission to file the materials under seal. Accordingly, no disposition can be reported from this text. The document is addressed to and bears the signature of Judge Lewis A. Kaplan.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.