R4GL Acquisition LLC v. Glorieta LLC, et al

Nature of the document

The provided text is a November 4, 2025 letter motion from counsel for Defendants Dilip Barot and Naimisha Barot to Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald. It asks the court to seal or redact Plaintiff’s forthcoming response to the Individual Defendants’ motion to partially dismiss the amended complaint and the response’s exhibits. The text does not include a court ruling on the request.

Background

On August 15, 2025, the Individual Defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint on two grounds: lack of personal jurisdiction over Mrs. Barot and failure to state a claim against Mr. and Mrs. Barot for aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty. Mrs. Barot agreed to limited jurisdiction-related discovery without giving up her defenses. The court later limited that discovery to documents concerning the structure and ownership of several entities and related formation, ownership, signature, tax-return, and organizational materials.

Mrs. Barot produced documents, including two internal organizational charts for Glorieta Partners and Globe-Op. The charts identified ownership holders and shareholders and listed their ownership percentages. The documents were marked confidential. During Mrs. Barot’s October 28, 2025 deposition, Plaintiff questioned her about the charts and used them as exhibits. Plaintiff later told defense counsel that it intended to file the charts with its response to the dismissal motion.

The request and the parties’ positions

Mrs. Barot requested that the court seal Plaintiff’s response and exhibits to the extent they referred to information from the organizational charts, including the charts themselves. She argued that the charts contained nonpublic ownership information about privately held businesses and that the information was obtained during limited, early-stage jurisdictional discovery. She also noted that NB Holdings and NB Florida Holdings were not parties to the action and argued that their business and financial privacy interests supported sealing.

Alternatively, Mrs. Barot asked the court to redact ownership percentages for Glorieta, New Vision, Naimisha Construction, Globe-Op, NB Holdings, and NB Florida Holdings from Plaintiff’s public filings and to seal the unredacted versions. The corporate defendants joined the request. Plaintiff opposed the request to seal the filings in full but agreed to propose redactions under the protective order.

Legal standard described in the letter

The letter describes the Second Circuit’s three-step framework for sealing judicial documents: whether the material is a judicial document, the strength of the public-access presumption, and whether countervailing interests outweigh that presumption. The letter states that Mrs. Barot did not dispute that Plaintiff’s response and exhibits were judicial documents, but argued that the presumption of public access was low for the ownership details.

Disposition

The provided text does not state that Judge Buchwald granted, denied, or otherwise ruled on the sealing or redaction request. Accordingly, it records a party’s motion and the opposing position, not a judicial disposition.