Hitach Capital America Corp. v. eCapital Corp.
- Analisa Torres
- 1:21-cv-02426
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Hitachi Capital America Corp. v. eCapital Corp., Judge Torres denied sealing motions but allowed amended motions addressing the deficiencies.
Hitachi Capital America Corp. and eCapital Corp., whose sealing motions were denied; the relevant exhibits remained sealed temporarily, subject to possible amended motions and later unsealing.
What happened
In Hitachi Capital America Corp. v. eCapital Corp., the parties asked the court to seal seventeen documents and related exhibits. They did not request narrower redactions or provide specific reasons for sealing each document.
The court found that the requests were not narrowly tailored. It also ruled that simply marking materials confidential during discovery did not overcome the public’s presumptive access to judicial documents.
Judge Torres denied the sealing motions. She allowed the parties to file amended motions, kept the exhibits sealed while those motions were considered, and ordered deadlines for amended motions and responses. Documents tied to a motion would be unsealed if the party failed to file an amended motion by August 9, 2022.
The detailed version
- Hitach Capital America Corp. v. eCapital Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-02426
- Analisa Torres
- Aug. 2, 2022
Background
The Court reviewed sealing motions filed by Hitachi Capital America Corp. and eCapital Corp., along with related exhibits. Collectively, the parties sought to seal seventeen documents. They did not propose narrower redactions and did not provide specific reasons for sealing each document.
Court’s Analysis
The Court held that the requests were not “narrowly tailored,” as required when seeking to restrict access to judicial documents. The parties relied only on confidentiality markings placed on materials during discovery. The Court ruled that a confidentiality order or agreement alone does not overcome the presumption that the public may access judicial documents.
Ruling and Deadlines
The Court denied the motions to seal at ECF Nos. 45 and 58. It permitted the parties to file amended sealing motions addressing the identified deficiencies and ordered that the exhibits remain sealed until the Court ruled on any amended motions. The parties’ amended motions were due by August 9, 2022, and responses to the opposing party’s motion were due by August 12, 2022. If either party failed to file an amended motion by August 9, the relevant documents would be unsealed. The Clerk was directed to terminate the two motions.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.