Abromavage v. Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:18-cv-06621
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Abromavage v. Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Judge Caproni granted revised sealing requests and directed the Clerk to close docket entry 87.
The plaintiff, the defendants, non-party interviewees whose identities could appear in investigative material, and members of the public seeking access to the judicial documents.
What happened
Abromavage v. Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. involved revised filings submitted after the court asked the parties to limit redactions in documents connected to the plaintiff’s opposition to summary judgment.
The revised redactions were limited to investigative material that could reasonably identify people interviewed who were not parties to the case. The revised filings included the plaintiff’s statement of disputed and undisputed facts and several exhibits.
Judge Valerie Caproni granted the plaintiff’s and defendants’ revised requests to seal, finding the narrower redactions consistent with the strong presumption that judicial documents should be publicly accessible. She directed the Clerk to close the open motion at docket entry 87.
The detailed version
- Abromavage v. Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-06621
- Valerie Caproni
- Mar. 15, 2021
Background
The plaintiff’s lawyer submitted revised versions of documents originally filed in connection with the plaintiff’s opposition to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The revisions followed the Court’s February 23, 2021 order and narrowed redactions of investigative material to entries that could reasonably be used to identify non-party interviewees.
The revised materials included the plaintiff’s Rule 56.1 counter-statement of disputed and undisputed material facts and several exhibits to a declaration. The filing also referred to revised sealing requests by both the plaintiff and the defendants.
Ruling
Judge Valerie Caproni granted the plaintiff’s and defendants’ revised requests to seal. The order stated that the narrower redactions were consistent with the strong presumption of public access to judicial documents and cited Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). The Clerk of Court was directed to close the open motion at docket entry 87.
Scope of the Order
This excerpt addresses sealing and redactions only. It does not decide the defendants’ motion for summary judgment or describe the underlying claims’ merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.