Allianz Global Investors GmbH v. Bank Of America Corporation
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:18-cv-10364
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Allianz Global Investors v. Bank of America, Judge Schofield granted requests to seal unredacted versions of a discovery-extension motion and related letter.
The plaintiffs and MUFG Bank, Ltd.; the ruling concerned public access to their unredacted filings and discovery deadlines concerning MUFG Bank.
What happened
Allianz Global Investors GmbH v. Bank Of America Corporation involved a request by the plaintiffs and MUFG Bank, Ltd. to keep certain unredacted filings from public view.
The filings were an unredacted version of a joint request to extend discovery deadlines concerning MUFG Bank and an unredacted version of the sealing request itself. Public versions with redactions had also been filed.
Judge Schofield granted the requests to seal under the standards described in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga. The available text does not clearly state the specific information that was redacted.
The detailed version
- Allianz Global Investors GmbH v. Bank Of America Corporation · No. 1:18-cv-10364
- Lorna Schofield
- Mar. 17, 2021
Background
The plaintiffs and Defendant MUFG Bank, Ltd. jointly sought permission to file under seal two documents: an unredacted version of a joint letter motion seeking extensions of various discovery deadlines as to MUFG Bank, and an unredacted version of the letter requesting permission to seal. The public versions were filed with redactions, while unredacted versions were filed electronically.
Ruling
The court stated that the requests to seal were granted under the standards articulated in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). The opinion text provided is fragmented and does not clearly identify the information that justified each redaction or describe any additional conditions on the sealing order.
Effect
The ruling allowed the identified unredacted filings to remain under seal. It concerned filing access and discovery scheduling, not the merits of the underlying dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.