Kashef v. BNP Paribas SA
- Alvin Hellerstein
- 1:16-cv-03228
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Kashef v. BNP Paribas, Judge Nathan granted plaintiffs’ requests to file redacted documents publicly and unredacted versions under seal.
The plaintiffs, BNP Paribas S.A. and the other defendants, and members of the public seeking access to the case filings.
What happened
In Kashef v. BNP Paribas S.A., the plaintiffs asked to seal materials connected to two discovery disputes and their opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss based on an inconvenient forum.
The court found that discovery materials generally have limited public-access rights and that the documents contained sensitive information. It also found that confidential client, employee, and commercial information in the opposition memorandum justified protection.
Judge Alison J. Nathan granted plaintiffs’ requests to file redacted versions publicly and unredacted versions under seal. The ruling resolved docket numbers 256, 269, and 277.
The detailed version
- Kashef v. BNP Paribas SA · No. 1:16-cv-03228
- Alvin Hellerstein
- Feb. 22, 2022
Background
The court considered three motions to seal filed by the plaintiffs. The requests concerned: (1) the plaintiffs’ motion to compel a response to a Civil Rule 33.3(a) interrogatory and related exhibits; (2) the plaintiffs’ motion to compel logged documents and request informal documents; and (3) the plaintiffs’ memorandum opposing the defendants’ motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens, meaning that another forum would be more appropriate. The defendants agreed that the documents and exhibits should remain under seal.
Court’s analysis
For a sealing request, the court first determines whether the materials are judicial documents, then assesses the strength of the public’s common-law right of access, and finally balances competing interests against that right.
The first two requests involved discovery disputes. The court stated that discovery materials are not presumptively accessible, including discovery materials filed with the court in connection with discovery-related disputes. It concluded that the sensitive nature of those documents and the limited public-access right justified sealing them.
The third request concerned the plaintiffs’ opposition memorandum. The court found that the memorandum contained detailed confidential information about BNP Paribas’s internal operations, including confidential client and employee information. It concluded that protecting sensitive commercial information outweighed the public-access interest and that the requested sealing was narrowly tailored.
Disposition
The court granted the plaintiffs’ requests for leave to file redacted versions of the documents on the public docket and unredacted versions under seal. The order resolved docket numbers 256, 269, and 277.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.