Syeed v. Bloomberg L.P.

Background

The order addresses motions to seal materials filed in connection with Bloomberg L.P.’s motion for summary judgment and motion to exclude evidence. The court treated materials submitted for consideration on summary judgment and materials related to the evidence-exclusion motion as judicial documents, meaning documents to which the public generally has a strong right of access. Bloomberg had the burden to show why sealing was necessary.

Rulings on the requested sealing

The court considered four categories of materials:

1. Nonparty employee records. Bloomberg sought to seal Employee Information Reports for Craig Gordon, Michael Shepard, Nick Wadhams, and David Wainer. The reports contained career histories, performance ratings, and personally identifying information. The court ruled that Bloomberg’s general practice of keeping the reports confidential was not enough to justify sealing them. It permitted redaction of personally identifying information, such as addresses, birthdays, and Social Security numbers, and permitted redaction of managers’ names if those managers were not mentioned in the parties’ briefs.

2. Nonparty compensation and relocation information. The court granted Bloomberg’s request to seal Wainer’s compensation information and the terms of his 2018 relocation from Tel Aviv to New York, as well as compensation information relating to Wadhams. The court accepted that this private financial information implicated third-party privacy interests and did not figure in the parties’ briefs.

3. Names of other nonparty employees. The court granted Bloomberg’s request to redact the names and related details of uninvolved nonparty employees only when, to Bloomberg’s knowledge, their names or roles did not already appear in materials publicly filed in connection with the motions. Names already appearing in public filings could not be sealed.

4. Information about Syeed. The court denied Bloomberg’s request to seal Syeed’s compensation information and other information in her Employee Information Report, except that Bloomberg could seal the names of managers in Syeed’s report who were not mentioned in the parties’ briefs. The court noted that Syeed had not sought to keep the information sealed and that Bloomberg’s personnel-record confidentiality practices alone did not overcome the public-access presumption.

The court also ruled that two redactions in Syeed’s opposition memorandum, at pages 13 and 25 of Docket 111, could not remain because they did not fit the permitted categories and quoted material already filed publicly.

Disposition

The motions to seal were granted as set forth in the order. Bloomberg was directed to refile, within 14 days, any materials filed under seal or with inconsistent redactions. It had to publicly file versions containing only permitted redactions and separately file unredacted versions under seal that identified those redactions. The Clerk was requested to terminate the motions at Docket ## 87, 100, 108, 110, 117, and 118. Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein issued the order.