FCS Advisors, LLC v. Theia Group, Inc.
- P. Castel
- 1:21-cv-06995
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In FCS Advisors v. Theia Group, Judge Castel was asked to permit temporary redactions of noteholders’ names and personal email addresses.
The individual “friends and family” noteholders whose names and personal email addresses appeared in the materials the receiver planned to file.
What happened
In FCS Advisors, LLC v. Theia Group, Inc., the receiver for Theia Group, Inc., Theia Aviation LLC, and Theta Holdings A, Inc. submitted a letter asking the court for permission to temporarily redact or seal certain information.
The requested redactions concerned the names and personal email addresses of individual “friends and family” noteholders whose emails were included in an exhibit to the receiver’s planned response to an order requiring an explanation. The letter argued that the information was private, narrowly limited, and not relevant to the court’s consideration of that order.
The provided text is a request, not a court ruling. It does not show that Judge P. Kevin Castel granted or denied the request.
The detailed version
- FCS Advisors, LLC v. Theia Group, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-06995
- P. Castel
- Feb. 15, 2022
Nature of the filing
The provided document is a February 10, 2022 letter from Reed Smith LLP to Judge P. Kevin Castel. It asks for permission to provisionally redact or seal limited information in an upcoming response and in an exhibit to that response. The letter states that it was submitted on behalf of Michael Fuqua, acting as receiver for Theia Group, Inc., Theia Aviation LLC, and Theta Holdings A, Inc.
Requested redactions
The receiver sought to redact the names and personal email addresses of individual holders of “friends and family” notes. The letter says copies of emails from those noteholders would be included in Exhibit D to the receiver’s response to the court’s January 26, 2022 order to show cause. It also requested redaction of references to the same information in the response itself.
Reason given
The letter argued that the noteholders had legitimate privacy interests in their names and personal email addresses. It further asserted that the proposed redactions were narrowly tailored and that the information was not relevant to the court’s consideration of the order to show cause. The letter cited Second Circuit decisions concerning public access to judicial documents and protection of personally identifying information.
Disposition
The provided text does not contain an order or other ruling by Judge Castel. It therefore does not show whether the request to redact or seal was granted, denied, or otherwise resolved.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.