Owen v. Elastos Foundation
- Gregory Woods
- 1:19-cv-05462
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Owen v. Elastos Foundation, Judge Moses allowed some sealing but required more support for another document.
The defendants’ sealing application was partly granted: specified exhibits may remain sealed, while sealing of Docket No. 171-16 required further briefing and could be denied through unsealing if the defendants did not file it.
What happened
In Owen, et al. v. Elastos Foundation, et al., the defendants asked to redact non-parties’ email addresses and financial account information and to seal a document they described as containing confidential legal advice.
The court allowed the listed documents to remain sealed, including Docket Nos. 171-4, 171-5, 171-7 through 171-10, and 171-12 through 171-15 and 171-18. The court did not yet approve sealing Docket No. 171-16.
Judge Barbara Moses ordered the defendants to file a supplemental letter brief supporting continued sealing of Docket No. 171-16 by November 21, 2022. She stated that the document would be unsealed if they did not do so and directed the Clerk to close the motions at Docket Nos. 167 and 172.
The detailed version
- Owen v. Elastos Foundation · No. 1:19-cv-05462
- Gregory Woods
- Nov. 14, 2022
Background
The defendants applied to redact personally identifying information of non-parties from several exhibits filed with the plaintiffs’ opposition to the defendants’ motion to deny class certification. The requested redactions concerned email addresses and financial account information. The defendants also asked to seal Exhibit 16, filed at Docket No. 171-16, because they described it as confidential and protected by attorney-client privilege and said it contained strategic legal advice provided to Elastos Foundation by its attorneys.
Court’s Ruling
The court granted the defendants’ application to the extent that the documents filed under seal at Docket Nos. 171-4, 171-5, 171-7, 171-8, 171-9, 171-10, 171-12, 171-13, 171-14, 171-15, and 171-18 could remain under seal.
The court required further briefing concerning Docket No. 171-16. It directed the defendants to file a supplemental letter brief by November 21, 2022, complying with the applicable practice rules and the requirement that sealing be essential to protect higher values and narrowly tailored to serve that interest. The court held that the defendants’ conclusory statement that the document was confidential and privileged was inadequate. If the defendants failed to file the supplemental brief on time, the court stated that Docket No. 171-16 would be unsealed.
Other Disposition
The court directed the Clerk of Court to close the motions at Docket Nos. 167 and 172. The order was signed by Barbara Moses, United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.