Dillard’s Inc., et al. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
- Victor Marrero
- 1:25-cv-04330
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Dillard’s v. Wells Fargo, Judge Marrero granted Wells Fargo’s request to seal an agreement and redact parts of its motion and exhibits.
Wells Fargo may file the agreement under seal and may file its motion to dismiss and specified exhibits under seal with redacted public versions. Dillard’s and the other parties may access the sealed filing, while the public will see the redacted versions.
What happened
In Dillard’s Inc. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Wells Fargo asked the court to seal its contract with Dillard’s and to publicly file redacted versions of its motion to dismiss and four exhibits.
Wells Fargo said the documents contained confidential business information, including credit criteria, approval rates, program and funding details, and payments under the contract. Dillard’s took no position and reserved its rights.
Judge Victor Marrero granted the request, allowing the agreement to be filed under seal and the motion and specified exhibits to be filed under seal with redacted public versions.
The detailed version
- Dillard’s Inc., et al. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. · No. 1:25-cv-04330
- Victor Marrero
- Nov. 7, 2025
Background
Wells Fargo submitted a letter motion seeking permission to file the agreement between Wells Fargo and Dillard’s entirely under seal. It also sought permission to file its motion to dismiss and Exhibits 8, 9, 11, and 12 under seal, with redacted versions available to the public.
Basis for the Request
Wells Fargo argued that the agreement contained confidential commercial and proprietary information whose disclosure could cause serious competitive harm to both Wells Fargo and Dillard’s. The information included specific credit-related criteria, approval rates, details about how the program operated and was funded, and amounts Wells Fargo paid Dillard’s under the agreement.
Wells Fargo also stated that the agreement treated its terms and conditions as confidential and that both parties had maintained that confidentiality. Dillard’s had filed the complaint and agreement under seal and had filed a public version of the complaint with specific agreement terms redacted. Dillard’s took no position on Wells Fargo’s request and reserved its rights.
Ruling
Judge Victor Marrero granted the request. The order allowed Wells Fargo to file the agreement under seal and to file its motion to dismiss and Exhibits 8, 9, 11, and 12 under seal, with redacted versions publicly available. The order also stated that all parties should have access to the sealed filing under the court’s individual practices.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.