Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 1, 2021

Cengage Learning, Inc v. Doe 1

Judge
Victor Marrero
Docket
1:18-cv-07382
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureEvidence
In one sentence

In Cengage Learning v. Ielisevych, Judge Marrero granted plaintiffs’ request to keep documents containing defendants’ full financial account numbers from public view.

Who this affects

The ruling affects the plaintiffs’ ability to file the identified documents and protects defendants’ full financial account numbers from public access. The opinion does not identify any broader effect.

What happened

Cengage Learning, Inc., et al. v. Ielisevych, et al. is an action brought by several educational publishers. The opinion concerns the publishers’ request to restrict public access to certain information in filed documents.

The publishers asked to file under seal their proposed default judgment and permanent injunction order, along with an exhibit to a declaration. They said the documents contained defendants’ full financial account numbers and that redacted versions would be filed publicly without those numbers.

Judge Victor Marrero granted the request. He authorized the plaintiffs to file the identified documents under seal as described in their request.

The detailed version

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

Case
Cengage Learning, Inc v. Doe 1 · No. 1:18-cv-07382
Judge
Victor Marrero
Date
Mar. 1, 2021

Background

The plaintiffs are Pearson Education, Inc.; McGraw Hill LLC; Bedford, Freeman & Worth Publishing Group, LLC; and Cengage Learning, Inc. The plaintiffs asked the court for permission to file certain documents under seal, meaning they would not be available for public access in their unredacted form.

Sealing request

The documents were the plaintiffs’ proposed default judgment and permanent injunction order and Exhibit 4 to the Declaration of Matthew I. Fleischman. The plaintiffs stated that the documents contained defendants’ full financial account numbers. They said they would file redacted versions publicly, with the financial account numbers removed, while filing the complete versions under seal so financial institutions could identify the relevant accounts.

The plaintiffs 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. They also argued that the account numbers were private information and that withholding them would not interfere with public understanding of the judicial process.

Ruling

Judge Victor Marrero granted the request. The court authorized the plaintiffs to file under seal the proposed default judgment and permanent injunction order and Exhibit 4 to the declaration, as described in the request. The opinion does not state any additional ruling on the underlying claims or on the proposed default judgment and permanent injunction.

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.