EFCG, Inc. v. AEC Advisors, LLC
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:19-cv-08076
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In EFCG v. AEC Advisors, Judge Abrams ordered defendants to justify sealing motion exhibits or file them unsealed.
The defendants, the exhibits submitted with their motion to dismiss, and the public’s access to those court filings.
What happened
In EFCG, Inc. v. AEC Advisors, LLC, the court addressed defendants’ filing of exhibits under seal in connection with their request to dismiss the amended complaint.
Defendants said sealing was justified because EFCG had marked the exhibits “Confidential.” The court said that designation alone did not explain why sealing overcame the strong presumption that federal court filings should be publicly accessible.
Judge Ronnie Abrams ordered defendants to explain by April 23, 2020, why sealing was justified, submit narrower redactions with an explanation, or file complete, unredacted exhibits. The order did not decide whether the exhibits ultimately should remain sealed.
The detailed version
- EFCG, Inc. v. AEC Advisors, LLC · No. 1:19-cv-08076
- Ronnie Abrams
- Apr. 16, 2020
Background
Defendants submitted exhibits connected to their motion to dismiss EFCG’s amended complaint under seal. They explained that EFCG had produced the exhibits with a “Confidential” designation.
Court’s Analysis
The court stated that a confidentiality designation does not by itself establish that court filings should be sealed. Under the standard described in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, parties seeking to seal judicial documents must show why sealing outweighs the strong presumption of public access to federal court records. The court noted that this concern is especially important when documents are submitted in support of a motion to dismiss.
Order
The court ordered defendants, no later than April 23, 2020, to explain why sealing the exhibits was justified under the Lugosch standard. If defendants wanted to submit narrower redactions, they also had to file them by that date and explain why the redactions were appropriate. If defendants no longer sought to seal the exhibits, they had to file complete, unredacted versions on the docket by April 23, 2020. The order did not itself determine whether sealing or redactions were ultimately justified. Judge Ronnie Abrams issued the order on April 16, 2020.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.