Shantou Taihui Trading Co. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations…
Shantou Taihui Trading Co. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified in Schedule A
- Katherine Failla
- 1:22-cv-04903
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Shantou Taihui Trading v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A: Judge Failla granted plaintiffs' motion to seal specified filings.
The ruling affects Shantou Taihui Trading Co. and Yueshen Ji, who sought sealing, and the defendants identified on Schedule A, whose marketplace-account and internet-store information was covered by the request.
What happened
In Shantou Taihui Trading Co. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, the plaintiffs asked to file under seal a list of defendant online marketplace accounts and screenshots of active internet stores. The case concerns a request for temporary relief in a design-patent-infringement action.
The plaintiffs said sealing was needed to prevent defendants from learning about the case before the requested temporary restraining order could be carried out. They argued that advance notice could lead to the destruction of evidence or the movement of assets, and said they would later seek to make the materials public after service and the requested actions.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. The clerk was directed to terminate the motions at docket entries 7 and 8.
The detailed version
- Shantou Taihui Trading Co. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations… · No. 1:22-cv-04903
- Katherine Failla
- June 15, 2022
Request
Shantou Taihui Trading Co. and Yueshen Ji asked for permission to file two categories of documents under seal: (1) Schedule A to the complaint, which listed the defendant online marketplace accounts; and (2) screenshots showing the active defendants' internet stores, included as Exhibit B to the complaint.
Plaintiffs' reasons
The plaintiffs stated that they were seeking temporary relief without advance notice in an action for design patent infringement. They argued that sealing the requested materials was necessary to prevent the defendants from learning about the case before the temporary restraining order was carried out. According to the plaintiffs, advance notice could result in the destruction of relevant documentary evidence or the hiding or transfer of assets to foreign jurisdictions, impairing their ability to enforce their patent rights and interfering with the court's ability to grant relief.
The plaintiffs also stated that the defendants would learn about the complaint and evidence through service and would not be prejudiced by the sealing request. They said they would later ask to make the documents public after the complaint, exhibits, and temporary restraining order had been served and the requested actions had been taken.
Ruling
Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. The clerk was directed to terminate the motions at docket entries 7 and 8. The opinion text does not provide a separate explanation of the court's reasoning beyond the order granting the application.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.