Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 10, 2020

Subramanian v. Lupin Inc.

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:17-cv-05040
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Subramanian v. Lupin Inc., Judge Abrams ordered confidential litigation materials sealed to protect business and third-party privacy interests.

Who this affects

The sellers, Lupin Inc., and third-party individuals or entities whose confidential settlement, business, financial, deposition, or privilege-related information appeared in the requested materials.

What happened

In Subramanian v. Lupin Inc., the sellers asked the court to file under seal parts of a motion to compel and several exhibits. They said the materials contained confidential settlement, business, financial, and deposition information involving Lupin and a third party.

The request concerned redacted portions of the motion, Exhibits G and H about a prior settlement, Exhibit F containing part of a purchase-and-sale agreement, and Exhibits A, B, E, and I containing deposition excerpts and discussions of asserted privilege. The filing argued that these materials should remain sealed under the standards governing public access to court records.

The document reflects that the court ordered the requested materials filed under seal. The supplied case information identifies Judge Ronnie Abrams, but the order text displays a “SO ORDERED” notation associated with Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.

The detailed version

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

Case
Subramanian v. Lupin Inc. · No. 1:17-cv-05040
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Aug. 10, 2020

Background

The sellers asked the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to accept under seal an unredacted letter motion to compel and certain attached exhibits. They said the documents contained information that the parties had previously designated as confidential.

The requested sealing covered:

- Redacted portions of the letter motion and Exhibits G and H, which the sellers said contained details of a confidential settlement agreement from a prior lawsuit between Lupin and a third party. - Exhibit F, which contained an excerpt from a purchase-and-sale agreement. The filing stated that Lupin had previously obtained permission to file that agreement under seal. - Exhibits A, B, E, and I, which contained extensive excerpts and discussions from depositions of Amy Brody and Sean Moriarty. The filing said those materials concerned Lupin’s settlement of a prior third-party lawsuit and Lupin’s claims of attorney-client or similar privilege over communications with experts. Lupin had designated the depositions confidential in their entirety.

Legal standard described in the filing

The filing stated that documents submitted with a summary-judgment motion generally carry a strong presumption of public access. It also relied on the principle that sealing may be appropriate when documents contain trade secrets, confidential research and development information, marketing plans, revenue or pricing information, proprietary business or financial information, or substantial third-party privacy interests.

Ruling

The document reflects that the court ordered the requested confidential materials filed under seal. The order text includes a “SO ORDERED” notation dated August 10, 2020. The supplied case metadata identifies Ronnie Abrams as the judge, while the order text names Katharine H. Parker as a magistrate judge and displays the order notation beneath her name. The text provided does not separately explain the scope of any sealing limitations beyond the materials described in the request.

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.