Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 22, 2025

People of the State of New York v. Early Warning Services

Full caption

People of the State of New York, by Letitia James, Attorney General of the State of New York v. Early Warning Services, LLC

Judge
Garnett
Docket
1:25-cv-07601
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In People of New York v. Early Warning Services, Judge Garnett granted Early Warning’s request to file the unredacted complaint under seal and set briefing deadlines.

Who this affects

The order affects Early Warning Services, LLC and the New York Office of the Attorney General by sealing the unredacted complaint and setting deadlines for briefing whether it should remain sealed.

What happened

People of the State of New York, by Letitia James, Attorney General of the State of New York v. Early Warning Services, LLC concerns a complaint alleging that Early Warning failed to safeguard the Zelle payment network from fraud. Before the case was moved to federal court, a New York state court temporarily sealed the complaint’s unredacted version.

After Early Warning removed the case to the Southern District of New York, it asked the federal court to keep the unredacted complaint sealed while the parties addressed what information should remain confidential. Early Warning also requested deadlines for its sealing motion and the New York Office of the Attorney General’s response.

Judge J. Margaret M. Garnett granted the request. She ordered the unredacted complaint filed under seal, allowed Early Warning to file a sealing letter motion of no more than five pages by September 29, 2025, and set October 13, 2025, as the deadline for the Attorney General’s response, if any.

The detailed version

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

Case
People of the State of New York v. Early Warning Services · No. 1:25-cv-07601
Judge
Garnett
Date
Sept. 22, 2025

Background

The New York Office of the Attorney General filed a complaint in New York state court alleging that Early Warning Services, LLC failed to safeguard the Zelle peer-to-peer payment network from fraud. The publicly available complaint included redactions, while an unredacted version was submitted under seal. The state court temporarily sealed the unredacted complaint and set deadlines for briefing about which portions should remain sealed.

Early Warning removed the action to the Southern District of New York on September 12, 2025. It argued that the state court’s temporary sealing order remained effective after removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1450, which provides that state-court orders entered before removal remain in force until the federal district court dissolves or modifies them. Early Warning asked the federal court to file the unredacted complaint under seal while it prepared a later motion explaining why some portions should remain sealed.

Ruling

Judge J. Margaret M. Garnett granted the request. Consistent with the state court’s order, the court ordered that the unredacted complaint be filed under seal. The court also adopted this briefing schedule: Early Warning must file a letter motion of no more than five pages explaining why the unredacted complaint should remain sealed by September 29, 2025; the New York Office of the Attorney General may respond by October 13, 2025. The order addressed sealing and scheduling only; the opinion does not decide the underlying allegations or the ultimate sealing question.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.