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 v. eCapital, Judge Torres granted revised requests to redact exhibits and set deadlines for filings and possible unsealing.
Hitachi Capital America Corp., eCapital Corp., and nonparty Woodforest National Bank, as to the handling and possible unsealing of specified exhibits and filings.
What happened
In Hitachi Capital America Corp. v. eCapital Corp., the parties asked to redact information from certain exhibits and keep other materials sealed. The court found that the requested redactions were narrowly tailored.
The court granted the revised sealing motions and ordered the parties to file specified redacted exhibits and compliance letters by August 11, 2022. It also stated that the Clerk would unseal listed filings on August 17 unless the relevant party or Woodforest National Bank filed a letter first.
Judge Analisa Torres also directed the Clerk to terminate the motions identified by docket numbers 70, 72, 82, and 83. The order addressed sealing and filing procedures, not the underlying merits of the case.
The detailed version
- Hitach Capital America Corp. v. eCapital Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-02426
- Analisa Torres
- Aug. 10, 2022
What the order addressed
The court reviewed the parties’ revised motions to seal or redact materials and the related exhibits. It found that the requested redactions were “narrowly tailored,” applying the standard cited from Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga.
Rulings and deadlines
The court granted the revised sealing motions. It ordered the parties to file, by August 11, 2022, the redacted version of Plaintiff’s Exhibit 15 and Defendant’s Exhibits D and H.
The court also referred to its individual practice requiring a party seeking to file materials under seal or in redacted form because another party or a nonparty requested it to notify that other party or nonparty. The recipient must then file, within three days, a letter explaining the need for sealing or redaction. Because the filings indicated that some exhibits belonged to the opposing party and to nonparty Woodforest National Bank, the court ordered the parties to file letters by August 11 confirming compliance with that rule and stating when notification occurred. Plaintiff also had to confirm that it notified Woodforest National Bank that it sought redactions only to Exhibit 15.
The court stated that, on August 17, 2022, it would order the Clerk of Court to unseal the listed docket entries unless it received a letter from the relevant opposing party or Woodforest National Bank. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 70, 72, 82, and 83.
Effect of the order
This was a procedural order about sealing, redactions, notifications, and docket management. It did not decide the parties’ underlying dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.