Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 3, 2022

American Exchange Time LLC v. Tissot SA

Judge
Ona Wang
Docket
1:17-cv-04737
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In American Exchange Time v. Tissot, Judge Wang denied a sealing request and ordered two filings unsealed.

Who this affects

American Exchange Time LLC, whose request to keep certain attorneys’ fee documents sealed was denied, and members of the public seeking access to those documents.

What happened

In American Exchange Time LLC v. Tissot S.A., the plaintiff asked the court to seal documents supporting its request for attorneys’ fees.

The court said it had relied on those documents when preparing its recommendation about attorneys’ fees. It therefore rejected the request to keep them sealed.

Judge Wang denied the sealing request, directed the Clerk to close the request, and ordered docket entries 81 and 82 unsealed.

The detailed version

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

Case
American Exchange Time LLC v. Tissot SA · No. 1:17-cv-04737
Judge
Ona Wang
Date
Nov. 3, 2022

Background

American Exchange Time LLC asked to seal certain documents filed in support of its motion for attorneys’ fees. The request was docket entry 77. The court stated that it had relied on the documents in making its Report and Recommendation concerning attorneys’ fees.

Ruling

The court denied the motion to seal. It relied on the presumption that documents forming a significant part of the record and directly affecting the court’s decision should generally be available to the public. The Clerk of Court was directed to close docket entry 77 and unseal docket entries 81 and 82.

Effect

The order made the identified documents available on the public docket. It addressed access to documents connected to the attorneys’ fee proceeding and did not state a ruling on the amount or entitlement to attorneys’ fees.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.