Cengage Learning, Inc. v. Doe 1
- John Koeltl
- 1:20-cv-00769
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Cengage Learning v. Doe 1, Judge Koeltl granted the request to seal defendants’ full financial account numbers.
The ruling affects the plaintiffs’ proposed filing and protects defendants’ full financial account numbers from public disclosure. The opinion does not identify the defendants’ individual circumstances beyond that information.
What happened
Cengage Learning, Inc. v. Doe 1 concerns a request by the plaintiffs to seal part of a proposed default judgment and permanent injunction order. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims.
The plaintiffs asked to file a redacted version publicly while keeping defendants’ full financial account numbers in three appendices under seal. They said the account numbers were needed so financial institutions could identify the accounts and that federal court rules generally require those numbers to be redacted.
Judge John G. Koeltl granted the application to seal the full financial account numbers. The opinion states that the proposed order would otherwise become public, but it does not describe any ruling on the proposed default judgment or permanent injunction.
The detailed version
- Cengage Learning, Inc. v. Doe 1 · No. 1:20-cv-00769
- John Koeltl
- Nov. 18, 2020
Background
The plaintiffs asked for permission to file under seal their proposed default judgment and permanent injunction order. They planned to file a publicly available version with the financial account numbers removed from Appendices D, E, and F.
The plaintiffs stated that the appendices contained defendants’ full financial account numbers. They relied on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(a)(4), which generally requires financial account numbers to be redacted unless the court orders otherwise. The plaintiffs said they needed the unredacted numbers so financial institutions receiving the order could identify the relevant accounts.
Ruling
The court granted the application to seal. The ruling permits the full financial account numbers to remain nonpublic while the redacted version of the proposed order is filed publicly. The opinion does not state that the court entered the proposed default judgment or permanent injunction, and it does not decide the underlying claims.
Classification
This is a procedural order because it addresses sealing information rather than the merits of the dispute.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.