ESPN Enters., Inc. v. DISH Network L.L.C.
- Subramanian
- 1:25-cv-07169
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In ESPN Enters. v. DISH Network, Judge Subramanian granted DISH’s request to seal confidential business materials filed with its preliminary-injunction opposition.
DISH Network L.L.C., the plaintiffs, and members of the public seeking access to the identified court filings were affected. The order allowed the requested confidential materials to be filed under seal or in redacted form.
What happened
ESPN Enters., Inc. v. DISH Network L.L.C. involved DISH’s request to keep certain materials from its opposition to a preliminary-injunction motion under seal or file them in redacted form.
DISH identified confidential contract terms, financial and subscriber information, business strategy, licensing agreements, and related correspondence. The letter said ESPN and the other plaintiffs consented to sealing material covered by the protective order.
Judge Arun Subramanian granted the request and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at Docket 44. The order addressed document access and did not decide the underlying dispute.
The detailed version
- ESPN Enters., Inc. v. DISH Network L.L.C. · No. 1:25-cv-07169
- Subramanian
- Oct. 17, 2025
Background
DISH Network L.L.C. asked the court for permission to redact and seal portions of its opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, supporting declarations, and certain exhibits. The requested materials concerned the terms and negotiation of carriage and licensing agreements, financial and subscriber information, marketing data, business strategy, and correspondence discussing confidential contract provisions.
DISH specifically sought to file redacted versions of its memorandum and several declarations, while filing the unredacted versions and Exhibits 4, 5, 6, and 12 under seal. The letter described Exhibit 4 as an excerpt from a 2019 carriage agreement, Exhibits 5 and 6 as correspondence about confidential contract terms, and Exhibit 12 as an excerpt from a 2022 license agreement. DISH argued that disclosure could cause competitive harm and hinder future negotiations. It also noted that comparable documents connected to the plaintiffs’ complaint and preliminary-injunction motion had been sealed. The letter stated that the plaintiffs consented to sealing material covered by the protective order.
Ruling
The court marked the request “GRANTED.” Judge Arun Subramanian directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at Docket 44. The order was limited to sealing and redaction of the identified filings; the opinion text does not state any ruling on the merits of the preliminary-injunction motion or the parties’ underlying dispute.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.