Jane Doe 3 et al. v. Darren K. Indyke
- Subramanian
- 1:24-cv-01204
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Jane Doe 3 v. Darren K. Indyke, Judge Subramanian granted motions to seal and leave to file a corrected declaration.
The parties to the case, the court’s docket, and members of the public seeking access to the filings covered by the sealing orders.
What happened
In Jane Doe 3 et al. v. Darren K. Indyke et al., the court considered several pending motions to seal filings in the case.
The court also considered a request to file a corrected declaration by Daniel Weiner. The opinion does not describe the filings’ contents or explain the correction.
Applying factors identified by the Second Circuit, Judge Arun Subramanian granted all pending motions to seal and granted leave to file the corrected declaration. The clerk was directed to terminate the listed motions.
The detailed version
- Jane Doe 3 et al. v. Darren K. Indyke · No. 1:24-cv-01204
- Subramanian
- Sept. 2, 2025
Rulings
The court granted the pending motions to seal, citing the factors articulated by the Second Circuit in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga. The opinion lists motions at Docket Nos. 195, 213, 221, 245, 253, 267, 271, 280, 286, 289, 299, 302, 316, 317, 321, 326, 338, and 350.
The court also granted the motion for leave to file a corrected declaration of Daniel Weiner at Docket No. 273.
Effect of the Order
The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motions listed in the order. The opinion does not disclose the documents’ contents, the reasons for the requested sealing beyond its reference to the Lugosch factors, or the nature of the correction to the declaration. This order addresses filing access and a corrected filing; it does not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.