IN RE: MINDBODY, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:19-cv-08331
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In re Mindbody Securities Litigation: Judge Caproni denied plaintiffs’ sealing motion, stayed discovery, and postponed class-certification deadlines.
Plaintiffs Walleye Trading LLC and Walleye Opportunities Master Fund Ltd., defendants, nonparty UBS Financial Services Inc., and the ongoing litigation were affected by the sealing ruling and case-management orders.
What happened
In In re Mindbody, Inc. Securities Litigation, plaintiffs asked to seal documents and redact allegations in a proposed second amended complaint based on confidentiality and privacy concerns raised by defendants and nonparty UBS Financial Services Inc.
The court held that a confidentiality designation or a nonparty’s request to keep documents private, without more explanation, did not overcome the public-access presumption for court documents. Plaintiffs were allowed to submit a new sealing motion by March 12, 2021, with narrower proposed redactions.
Judge Valerie Caproni denied plaintiffs’ motion to seal without prejudice, stayed discovery, and postponed indefinitely plaintiffs’ deadline to move for class certification while the motion to amend was pending. The clerk was directed to close the motion at docket entry 70.
The detailed version
- IN RE: MINDBODY, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION · No. 1:19-cv-08331
- Valerie Caproni
- Feb. 25, 2021
Background
Plaintiffs Walleye Trading LLC and Walleye Opportunities Master Fund Ltd. were seeking permission to file a proposed second amended complaint. They asked to file under seal documents produced by defendants and nonparty UBS Financial Services Inc., and to redact allegations based on those documents. The requests were based on confidentiality designations, privacy concerns, information about Defendant Richard L. Stollmeyer’s personal finances, the Mindbody and Vista merger-and-acquisition process, and deliberations by Mindbody’s senior officers and board.
Sealing ruling
The court stated that judicial documents are presumed to be available to the public, especially when they directly affect the court’s adjudication of the case. Under the cited Second Circuit standard, a party seeking redactions must show that a higher value justifies limiting access. The court held that a protective-order confidentiality designation and a nonparty’s request to seal documents, standing alone and without additional explanation, were insufficient.
The court denied without prejudice plaintiffs’ motion to seal. Plaintiffs were required to refile the motion under the judge’s individual practices by March 12, 2021. The court said it was unlikely to approve sweeping redactions and encouraged narrower ones. It also stated that plaintiffs could file a joint sealing motion with defendants, but required plaintiffs to refile newly redacted and public versions of their motion to amend and supporting documents in accordance with the order.
Other case-management actions
The court stayed discovery and postponed indefinitely plaintiffs’ deadline to file a motion for class certification while the motion to file an amended complaint was pending. The clerk was directed to close the open motion at docket entry 70.
Disposition
Judge Valerie E. Caproni denied without prejudice plaintiffs’ motion to seal, stayed discovery, postponed the class-certification deadline indefinitely, and directed the clerk to close the motion at docket entry 70. The text does not state the court’s ruling on the motion to file the second amended complaint.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.