WarnerMedia Network Sales, Inc. et al., v. DISH Network L.L.C.
- Subramanian
- 1:25-cv-07463
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
WarnerMedia Network Sales v. DISH Network, Judge Subramanian granted DISH’s request to seal and redact confidential business information.
DISH Network L.L.C., the plaintiffs, non-parties whose business or financial information appeared in the materials, and members of the public seeking access to the court filings.
What happened
WarnerMedia Network Sales, Inc. et al. v. DISH Network L.L.C. involved DISH’s request to seal parts of its motion seeking to disqualify Allan Shampine, Ph.D., as the plaintiffs’ expert. DISH sought to redact information about carriage agreements, finances, and business strategy, along with a confidential agreement.
DISH argued that disclosure could cause competitive harm and expose non-parties’ business and financial records. The plaintiffs consented to sealing material covered by the protective order.
Judge Arun Subramanian granted DISH’s request and directed the clerk to terminate the motion at Docket 88. The order allowed DISH to file redacted versions of the memorandum and declaration, but it did not resolve the underlying request to disqualify the expert.
The detailed version
- WarnerMedia Network Sales, Inc. et al., v. DISH Network L.L.C. · No. 1:25-cv-07463
- Subramanian
- Nov. 6, 2025
Background
DISH filed a letter-motion asking for permission to redact and file under seal portions of its memorandum supporting a motion to disqualify Allan Shampine, Ph.D., from acting as the plaintiffs’ expert. DISH also sought to seal related portions of the declaration of Andrew Golodny and Exhibit 1 to that declaration, which was a confidential agreement.
Basis for the Request
DISH identified the material as involving the terms of its carriage agreements, sensitive financial information, and confidential business strategy. It stated that some materials were designated “Highly Confidential—Attorneys’ Eyes Only Information” and others were designated “Confidential Information” under the protective order. DISH argued that disclosure of the information could harm its ability to negotiate future licensing agreements and could expose non-parties’ business and financial records. The plaintiffs consented to sealing material subject to the protective order.
Ruling
The court marked the request “GRANTED.” The court directed the clerk to terminate the motion at Docket 88. The order therefore granted DISH’s request to file a redacted version of the memorandum and the Golodny declaration. The opinion does not separately describe the precise redactions approved or decide the underlying motion to disqualify the expert.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.