Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 4, 2022

Pharo Gaia Fund Ltd. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:19-cv-03123
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Pharo Gaia Fund v. Venezuela, Judge Torres granted plaintiffs’ request to redact confidential source information from a protective order.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs, Pharo Gaia Fund, Ltd. and Pharo Macro Fund, Ltd., and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela; the ruling also protects the confidentiality of sources whose identities could appear in the proposed protective order.

What happened

Pharo Gaia Fund Ltd. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela involved plaintiffs’ post-judgment efforts to obtain information under subpoenas. Venezuela had produced highly confidential information under an existing protective order.

The plaintiffs asked to file parts of a proposed protective order under seal. They sought to redact the name of another party and other limited information that could identify the sources of subpoenaed information. Venezuela agreed to the request.

Judge Analisa Torres granted the request on May 4, 2022. The order allowed the requested narrow redactions while keeping the rest of the protective order available to the public.

The detailed version

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

Case
Pharo Gaia Fund Ltd. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela · No. 1:19-cv-03123
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
May 4, 2022

Background

The plaintiffs, Pharo Gaia Fund, Ltd. and Pharo Macro Fund, Ltd., were pursuing post-judgment discovery. Venezuela had produced highly confidential information under an earlier protective order in the case. The plaintiffs obtained information about another party through that production and used it in preparing a proposed protective order related to their discovery efforts.

Sealing Request

The plaintiffs asked permission to file portions of the proposed protective order under seal. Specifically, they sought to redact the other party’s name and limited information that could identify the sources of information to be produced under post-judgment subpoenas. The plaintiffs argued that the public-access presumption could be overcome to protect confidential information and that the proposed redactions were narrowly tailored. Venezuela consented to the application.

Ruling

Judge Analisa Torres granted the request. The ruling permitted the requested redactions in the publicly filed version of the protective order. The order did not seal the entire document; it allowed redaction of the limited information that could identify confidential sources while preserving public access to the remaining material.

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.