Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled Sept. 26, 2025

Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, et al. v. MaxLinear, inc.

Judge
Alvin Hellerstein
Docket
1:23-cv-04436
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Comcast Cable Communications Management v. MaxLinear, Judge Hellerstein received Comcast’s request to redact and seal documents; the provided text contains no ruling.

Who this affects

Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC; Comcast Cable Communications, LLC; MaxLinear, inc.; and the public’s access to the identified court-filed materials.

What happened

In Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, et al. v. MaxLinear, inc., Comcast asked the court to allow redactions in a joint discovery letter and several exhibits, while filing unredacted versions under seal. Comcast said the materials contain confidential business, commercial, market, customer, and technology information. MaxLinear did not oppose the request pending review of Comcast’s specific redactions, although Comcast disagreed that one exhibit contained MaxLinear’s confidential or trade-secret information.

Comcast argued that public disclosure could cause financial harm, competitive disadvantages, and problems in future negotiations. It asked for temporary redactions of information connected to MaxLinear to give MaxLinear an opportunity to seek permanent sealing.

The provided text does not include a court order or ruling by Judge Hellerstein. It is a letter requesting permission to file redacted documents publicly and unredacted documents under seal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, et al. v. MaxLinear, inc. · No. 1:23-cv-04436
Judge
Alvin Hellerstein
Date
Sept. 26, 2025

Nature of the document

The provided text is a September 18, 2025 letter from Comcast’s counsel to Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein. It requests permission to file certain materials in redacted form on the public docket and unredacted versions under seal. The text does not contain a judicial order or disposition.

Materials at issue

The request concerns a joint letter about MaxLinear’s requests for production numbers 66 and 67; excerpts from two Comcast internal documents; excerpts from a Comcast executive’s deposition transcript; and MaxLinear’s responses and objections to Comcast Interrogatory No. 5.

Arguments in the letter

Comcast states that proposed redactions in the joint letter and several exhibits concern confidential information about its cable-network rollout plans, commercial arrangements with vendors, terms of arrangements with MaxLinear and other non-party vendors, and sensitive market information about its broadband Internet business and customers. Comcast argues that disclosure could cause financial harm and competitive disadvantage, including by giving competitors information about vendor relationships, business practices, and negotiation positions.

Comcast also states that MaxLinear considers Exhibit 6 to contain confidential, proprietary, or trade-secret information about its technology. Comcast disagrees with that position but seeks temporary redactions of Exhibit 6 and related information so MaxLinear can decide whether to request permanent sealing. The letter says the parties met and conferred and that MaxLinear did not oppose the request pending review of Comcast’s specific proposed redactions.

Status

The letter asks the court to accept the narrowly tailored redacted versions of the identified documents. The provided text does not state whether Judge Hellerstein granted, denied, or otherwise resolved the request.

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.