SS&C Techs. Holdings, Inc. v. D. E. Shaw & Co.
- Ona Wang
- 1:23-cv-09158
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In SS&C Techs. v. D. E. Shaw, Judge Wang granted permission to redact alleged trade-secret pricing information and file the unredacted answer under seal.
The ruling affected D. E. Shaw & Co., L.P., the plaintiffs, and public access to the answer and counterclaims. It allowed limited redactions concerning pricing information alleged to be the plaintiffs’ trade secret.
What happened
In SS&C Techs. Holdings, Inc. v. D. E. Shaw & Co., D. E. Shaw & Co., L.P. asked to publicly file a redacted answer and counterclaims to the plaintiffs’ amended complaint, while filing the unredacted version under seal.
The requested redactions concerned information about the pricing of the plaintiffs’ Geneva product, which the plaintiffs alleged was a trade secret. D. E. Shaw said it did not agree that the information was a trade secret but sought narrow redactions because of the privacy concerns involved.
Judge Ona T. Wang granted the application. The ruling allowed the redacted public filing and the filing of the unredacted answer under seal.
The detailed version
- SS&C Techs. Holdings, Inc. v. D. E. Shaw & Co. · No. 1:23-cv-09158
- Ona Wang
- Oct. 21, 2025
Request
D. E. Shaw & Co., L.P. requested permission to file a redacted public version of its answer and counterclaims to the plaintiffs’ amended complaint, with an unredacted version filed under seal.
Reasoning Presented
The letter explained that court documents are generally presumed to be accessible to the public. It also stated that courts balance that presumption against countervailing interests, including the privacy interests of people or entities resisting disclosure.
The material D. E. Shaw sought to redact concerned the pricing of the plaintiffs’ Geneva product, which the plaintiffs alleged was trade-secret information. D. E. Shaw did not agree that the information was a trade secret, but requested minimal and narrowly tailored redactions because of the privacy concern.
Ruling
The court endorsed and granted the application. The ruling permitted D. E. Shaw to redact the specified material from the public version of its answer and counterclaims and to file an unredacted version under seal. The text supplied is an endorsed letter motion rather than a longer opinion explaining the court’s analysis.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.