Vogel v. TakeOne Network Corp. d/b/a Wrapbook
- Subramanian
- 1:22-cv-03991
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Vogel v. TakeOne, Judge Subramanian granted defendants’ request to seal or redact materials containing sensitive business and personal information.
The defendants, Wrapbook, the plaintiff’s filed materials, and non-parties whose personal or confidential information appeared in those materials were affected. The order limited public access to specified documents or portions of documents.
What happened
In Vogel v. TakeOne Network Corp. d/b/a Wrapbook, et al., the defendants asked the court to keep certain materials from the plaintiff’s summary-judgment and expert-related filings sealed or to allow redactions. The materials included statements of facts and exhibits.
The defendants said the materials contained confidential financial, business, marketing, product, technology, and investment information, along with personal information such as addresses and phone numbers. They asked to redact parts of some documents and to seal Exhibits 37, 52, 53, 54, and 89 completely.
The court granted the request. Judge Arun Subramanian’s order directed the clerk to terminate the motion; the text does not provide further reasoning beyond the defendants’ request and supporting explanation.
The detailed version
- Vogel v. TakeOne Network Corp. d/b/a Wrapbook · No. 1:22-cv-03991
- Subramanian
- Sept. 29, 2025
Background
Defendants TakeOne Network Corp. d/b/a Wrapbook, Ali Javid, Naysawn Naji, Hesham El-Nahhas, and Cameron Woodward asked the court to approve sealing and redacting materials that the plaintiff filed in opposition to the defendants’ summary-judgment and expert-evidence motions. The request referred to materials filed on March 12 and 13, 2025 and to an earlier court order concerning those filings.
Requested Sealing and Redactions
The defendants requested redactions in the plaintiff’s response to the defendants’ statement of facts, the plaintiff’s counter-statement of facts, and Exhibits 20, 31, 33, 36, 39–42, 44, 51, 55, 61, 76, and 90. They asked to seal Exhibits 37, 52, 53, 54, and 89 in their entirety.
The defendants stated that the materials included confidential financial information; sensitive business operations, marketing, product, and strategy information; source-code and technology information; privately negotiated investment terms; and capitalization information. They also identified personal information for redaction or protection, including residential addresses and phone numbers belonging to defendants, non-parties, and investors.
The defendants argued that disclosure could harm Wrapbook’s competitiveness and its position in future financing negotiations. They also argued that the proposed redactions were narrowly tailored and would have limited effect on the public’s understanding of the case.
Ruling
The court marked the request “GRANTED” and stated that the clerk should terminate the motion. Judge Arun Subramanian did not provide additional reasoning in the text supplied. The order therefore granted the defendants’ request to seal or redact the specified materials, but the supplied text does not separately describe the precise filing procedures or the duration of the sealing order.
Disposition
The defendants’ letter-motion to file under seal was granted. This was an access-to-court-records ruling and did not decide the parties’ underlying claims or the pending summary-judgment and expert-evidence issues.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.