Delta Air Lines Inc. v. Bombardier Inc.

Background

Bombardier asked the court for permission to file four exhibits under seal, with redacted versions filed publicly. The exhibits were Exhibit 4, Letter Agreement No. LA-C0922-01; Exhibit 5, Letter Agreement No. LA-C0922-07; Exhibit 6, Letter Agreement No. LA-C0922-20; and Exhibit 8, Contract Change Order No. 3 concerning PA-C0922. The requested redactions concerned specific pricing or dollar references. Delta consented.

Bombardier stated that the court had previously permitted redactions of specific dollar references in the complaint. It also stated that the additional references were of the same nature and were not expected to affect the court’s ruling on the motion to dismiss. Bombardier said it had avoided citing dollar references in its dismissal-motion memorandum to limit the amount of material filed under seal.

Legal standard

The court referred to the common-law presumption that the public may access judicial documents—documents relevant to the court’s work and useful in the judicial process. That presumption may be balanced against competing privacy interests. The court’s prior orders had treated the specific dollar references as having relatively little importance to public access and had allowed pricing information in the complaint to be sealed because it was unlikely to affect the court’s decision about whether Bombardier breached its contract with Delta.

Ruling

Judge Gregory H. Woods granted Bombardier’s request to file the highlighted, unredacted versions of Exhibits 4, 5, 6, and 8 under seal and to file redacted versions of those exhibits. The court noted that its assessment of public access and the appropriateness of sealing could change if additional information were presented. This order addressed document sealing; it did not resolve the motion to dismiss or the underlying contract claims.

Disposition

Application granted.