Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled June 7, 2021

Innovatus Capital Partners, LLC v. Neuman

Judge
Louis Stanton
Docket
1:18-cv-04252
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Innovatus Capital Partners v. Neuman, Judge Stanton’s text is counsel’s request to seal materials, not a court ruling.

Who this affects

Innovatus Capital Partners, LLC, the MV Realty parties identified in the letter, and members of the public seeking access to the referenced court filing.

What happened

In Innovatus Capital Partners, LLC v. Neuman, Innovatus’s lawyers asked permission to file part of a June 2, 2021 letter under seal, meaning hidden from public access.

The requested redactions concerned information that the MV Realty parties had labeled “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL,” including information that could reveal business or financial strategies. The letter says the parties’ protective order required them to follow court procedures for sealed filings.

The text does not show that Judge Louis Stanton granted or denied the request. It is a letter from Innovatus’s counsel asking for permission to file under seal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Innovatus Capital Partners, LLC v. Neuman · No. 1:18-cv-04252
Judge
Louis Stanton
Date
June 7, 2021

Document and request

The provided text is a letter from Michael H. McGinley, counsel for Innovatus Capital Partners, LLC, to Judge Louis Stanton. Innovatus asked for permission to file under seal portions of its June 2, 2021 letter responding to a May 24, 2021 letter seeking a pre-motion conference.

Basis for the request

Innovatus said the proposed redactions would protect references to and quotations from information designated “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL” by the MV Realty parties. The letter describes that designation as covering information that the designating party believes could cause serious financial, competitive, or other injury if disclosed, and that could not be protected through less restrictive means. Innovatus also cited the parties’ protective order and authorities discussing the sealing of proprietary business information.

The letter identifies the “MV Realty Parties” as certain defendants and cross-claimants in the Innovatus action and MV Realty PBC, LLC, the plaintiff in a related action. It says counsel for those parties might submit a separate letter supporting the sealing request.

Disposition

The provided text does not contain an order or other ruling by Judge Stanton. It therefore does not show whether the request to file under seal was granted, denied, or otherwise resolved.

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.