Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 14, 2020

Intrepid Financial Partners, LLC v. Fernandez

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:20-cv-09779
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePreliminary Injunction
In one sentence

In Intrepid Financial v. Fernandez, Judge Swain granted most sealing requests but required limited disclosures in a public filing.

Who this affects

Intrepid Financial Partners, LLC and Antonio C. Fernandez, because the order controlled public access to filings and required limited disclosure of material in one docket entry.

What happened

Intrepid Financial Partners, LLC v. Antonio C. Fernandez involved the plaintiff’s request to correct filings supporting its motion for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiff said the documents contained sensitive non-public information, including proprietary information, trade secrets, and personal compensation information.

The plaintiff asked to file redacted versions publicly and unredacted versions under seal. The defendant consented, and the parties agreed to follow confidentiality designations temporarily while preserving their right to challenge those designations.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain granted the sealing and redaction requests except for material highlighted in paragraphs 1 through 4 and 6 of Docket Entry 53. She required the plaintiff to file a public version of that entry without those redactions and restricted access to Docket Entries 44 and 45 to the plaintiff and defendant.

The detailed version

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

Case
Intrepid Financial Partners, LLC v. Fernandez · No. 1:20-cv-09779
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Dec. 14, 2020

Background

Intrepid Financial Partners, LLC submitted a letter motion seeking to correct inadvertent filings and restrict public access to documents supporting its motion for a preliminary injunction. The requested filings included a memorandum, declarations, and exhibits. The plaintiff described the information to be redacted as sensitive non-public information, including proprietary information, trade secrets, and personal financial compensation. The request relied on the parties’ protective order and cited standards concerning public access to judicial documents.

The defendant consented to the request. The parties also agreed to follow the confidentiality designations placed on documents by the producing party until they could confer further, while reserving the right to challenge those designations.

Ruling

Judge Laura Taylor Swain granted the requested redactions and related sealing, except for the request to redact and seal material highlighted in paragraphs 1 through 4 and 6 of Docket Entry 53. The court ordered that the sealed material be accessible only to the plaintiff and defendant. It directed the plaintiff to re-file a public version of Docket Entry 53 with the redactions in paragraphs 1 through 4 and 6 removed. The Clerk was directed to restrict access to Docket Entries 44 and 45 to the parties only.

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.