City of Providence, Rhode Island v. Bats Global Markets, Inc.
- Jesse Furman
- 1:14-cv-02811
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
City of Providence v. BATS Global Markets: Judge Furman temporarily granted Lead Plaintiffs’ request to seal class-certification materials.
Lead Plaintiffs and defendants whose designated confidential or highly confidential information appeared in the proposed filings.
What happened
In City of Providence, Rhode Island v. BATS Global Markets, Inc., Lead Plaintiffs asked to file their motion for class certification and supporting materials under seal because defendants had designated some information as confidential or highly confidential.
The court temporarily granted the motion to seal. It said it would decide whether the redactions should remain when ruling on the underlying motion and instructed Lead Plaintiffs to keep redactions narrowly tailored.
Judge Jesse M. Furman also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF No. 597. This order addressed only temporary sealing and did not decide the class-certification motion.
The detailed version
- City of Providence, Rhode Island v. Bats Global Markets, Inc. · No. 1:14-cv-02811
- Jesse Furman
- May 28, 2021
Background
Lead Plaintiffs asked the court to authorize filing their motion for class certification and supporting materials under seal. They said the materials contained information that one or more defendants had designated as “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential” under a protective order. Lead Plaintiffs stated that they intended to file a public, redacted version of the brief and certain supporting materials that were not confidential.
Ruling
The court granted the motion to seal temporarily. The court stated that it would assess whether the materials should remain redacted when deciding the underlying motion. It also instructed Lead Plaintiffs to make sure that all redactions were narrowly tailored to the considerations supporting secrecy, given the presumption favoring public access to court records.
The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF No. 597. The opinion did not decide the motion for class certification or the underlying dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.