Franchitti v. Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation
- Jesse Furman
- 1:21-cv-02174
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Franchitti v. Cognizant, Judge Furman granted Cognizant’s application to keep EEOC conciliation materials sealed and directed the Clerk to terminate Docket No. 73.
Franchitti, Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation, Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation, and members of the public seeking access to filings containing information about the EEOC conciliation process.
What happened
In Franchitti v. Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation, Cognizant asked the court to keep temporarily sealed filings containing information from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s conciliation process. Cognizant also asked that related information in future public filings be redacted, with unredacted versions filed under seal.
Cognizant argued that federal law protects information exchanged during the conciliation process from public use without written consent. The request concerned filings and allegations related to that process, including material in the complaint, amended complaint, and motions to dismiss.
Judge Jesse M. Furman granted the application. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate Docket No. 73.
The detailed version
- Franchitti v. Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation · No. 1:21-cv-02174
- Jesse Furman
- Aug. 1, 2022
Background
Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation and Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation asked the court to keep certain filings temporarily sealed. The requested protection covered information about the conciliation process conducted by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, including allegations and materials in the complaint, amended complaint, and motions to dismiss.
Cognizant argued that Section 706(b) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(b), prohibits using as evidence anything said or done during the conciliation process without the written consent of the people concerned. It asked that filings related to the process remain sealed or be redacted, and that unredacted versions be filed under seal.
Ruling
Judge Furman granted Cognizant’s application. The order directed the Clerk of Court to terminate Docket No. 73. The provided opinion text does not include a separate explanation from the court for the ruling beyond the statement that the application was granted.
Effect
The ruling continued the requested sealing and redaction treatment for filings related to the conciliation process, as described in Cognizant’s application. The order’s text does not specify the individual documents affected beyond that description.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.