Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 11, 2020

Santiago Rocael Perez Ramirez v. A Spice Route, Inc.

Judge
Lewis Liman
Docket
1:19-cv-07641
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Perez Ramirez v. A Spice Route, Judge Liman granted a request to seal a letter containing sensitive tax and immigration-related information.

Who this affects

The plaintiff, whose tax and immigration-related information was to be kept from public access, and the public’s ability to view the attached letter.

What happened

In Santiago Rocael Perez Ramirez v. A Spice Route, Inc., the plaintiff asked the court to seal a letter about his ability to obtain an income-tax transcript from the Internal Revenue Service.

The request concerned private information that could reference the plaintiff’s immigration status, Social Security number, or individual taxpayer identification number. The letter also stated that the defendants were investigating whether the plaintiff had worked for anyone else during the relevant period.

The court granted the motion to seal. Judge Lewis J. Liman found that the privacy interests in the information outweighed the public’s right to access it, and noted concerns that disclosure could discourage legitimate lawsuits.

The detailed version

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

Case
Santiago Rocael Perez Ramirez v. A Spice Route, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-07641
Judge
Lewis Liman
Date
June 11, 2020

Background

The plaintiff’s counsel asked the court to file an attached letter under seal. The letter concerned the plaintiff’s ability to obtain a tax transcript from the Internal Revenue Service. The request followed a June 4, 2020 discovery telehearing in which the court discussed the sensitive nature of the information, and a stipulated protective order that the parties had filed but that had not yet been ordered by the court.

Request and Reasons

The plaintiff argued that the letter contained highly private information, including references to immigration status, a Social Security number, and an individual taxpayer identification number. The letter stated that the court was allowing the defendants to investigate the plaintiff’s tax reporting to determine whether he had been employed by anyone else while employed by the defendants.

The plaintiff cited decisions stating that courts generally hesitate to require disclosure of income-tax records because of the sensitive information they contain and the public interest in encouraging complete and accurate tax filings. The plaintiff also cited a decision warning that disclosure of immigration-related information could expose workers to possible removal or criminal prosecution and discourage legitimate lawsuits.

Ruling

The court granted the motion to seal. The ruling relied on the court’s broad discretion over sealing filed documents and concluded that the interest in keeping the information private outweighed the public’s right of access. The text provided is a counsel’s letter containing the court’s “Motion to Seal GRANTED” notation rather than a separate explanatory opinion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.