Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 4, 2025

In re China Construction Bank Corp.

Judge
Victor Marrero
Docket
1:24-cv-03591
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In re China Construction Bank Corp., Judge Parker granted CCB Asia’s motion to seal an exhibit containing commercially sensitive financial information.

Who this affects

CCB Asia, whose confidential business information may be filed under seal, and members of the public seeking access to that exhibit.

What happened

In In re China Construction Bank Corp., CCB Asia asked to file an exhibit under seal in support of its opposition to plaintiffs’ requests for more jurisdictional discovery. The exhibit concerned CCB Asia’s sources of revenue, customers, competitive position, and other business information.

The court found that the exhibit contained highly confidential and commercially sensitive financial information. It ruled that protecting CCB Asia from possible substantial commercial harm outweighed the public’s interest in access and granted the motion to file the exhibit under seal.

Judge Katharine H. Parker applied the three-part standard for sealing court records and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at ECF No. 141.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
In re China Construction Bank Corp. · No. 1:24-cv-03591
Judge
Victor Marrero
Date
Dec. 4, 2025

Background

Defendant CCB Asia filed a letter motion seeking permission to file under seal an exhibit related to its opposition to plaintiffs’ letter motions to compel additional jurisdictional discovery. The motion was filed at ECF No. 141.

Legal standard

The court described the three-part standard for sealing a court record. First, it determines whether the material is a “judicial document”—a filed item relevant to the court’s work and useful in the judicial process. If so, a presumption of public access applies.

Second, the court determines how much weight to give that presumption. The presumption is strongest for materials connected to motions that could decide the parties’ substantive rights, such as motions to dismiss or for summary judgment. It is weaker for materials submitted during discovery disputes or other motions that do not decide the case.

Third, the court considers whether competing interests outweigh public access. Sealing must be necessary to protect a higher value and narrowly tailored, meaning that it covers only information requiring protection. Protecting competitively sensitive business information can qualify as a higher value.

Court’s analysis

The court found that the exhibit contained highly confidential and commercially sensitive financial information, including information about CCB Asia’s sources of revenue, customers, competitive positioning, and customer data. It concluded that public disclosure could cause the company substantial commercial harm.

The court therefore determined that the need to protect the specific financial information outweighed the public-access interest and that sealing was narrowly tailored to protect the business interests involved.

Disposition

The court granted Defendant CCB Asia’s motion to file the document under seal. It directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at ECF No. 141.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.