Farsura v. QC Terme US Corp
- Loretta Preska
- 1:21-cv-09030
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Farsura v. QC Terme, Judge Lehrburger granted QC Terme US Corp.’s request to seal two exhibits containing sensitive financial information.
QC Terme US Corp., White Bridge, the other parties connected to the confidential documents, and members of the public seeking access to Exhibits A and B.
What happened
In Farsura v. QC Terme US Corp., QC Terme asked the court to seal Exhibits A and B attached to a filing about the plaintiffs’ request to amend their complaint. QC Terme said the exhibits contained nonpublic financial information, including balance sheets, profit-and-loss statements, business plans, and projections. The plaintiffs did not object.
The requested sealing concerned the public’s access to the exhibits. QC Terme argued that the documents contained commercially sensitive information that competitors could use to harm QC Terme or White Bridge. The request also relied on the parties’ confidentiality designations and a protective order.
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger granted the request and ordered Exhibits A and B to be sealed. The order did not decide the plaintiffs’ request to amend their complaint or the underlying dispute.
The detailed version
- Farsura v. QC Terme US Corp · No. 1:21-cv-09030
- Loretta Preska
- Dec. 5, 2022
Background
QC Terme US Corp. filed a letter asking the court to seal Exhibits A and B attached to its filing at ECF No. 227. The filing concerned a request for full briefing on the plaintiffs’ motion for permission to amend their complaint. QC Terme said the exhibits contained sensitive business information, and the plaintiffs did not object to keeping them under seal.
Reasons for Sealing
QC Terme argued that the exhibits contained nonpublic financial information about QC Terme US and previously dismissed defendants. The exhibits consisted of investment documents completed by White Bridge and included detailed balance sheets, profit-and-loss statements, future business plans, and financial projections. The parties had designated both documents as confidential. The opinion also states that the plaintiffs had produced one document as confidential and had not challenged the confidentiality designation of the other through the procedure in the protective order.
The court’s discussion explained that some court filings may be subject to a public right of access under the common law or the First Amendment. It stated that confidential business information, including information that could harm a company if used by competitors, may justify sealing when the applicable access standards are met.
Ruling
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger granted QC Terme’s request and ordered Exhibits A and B to ECF No. 227 sealed. The opinion does not state that this ruling resolved the motion to amend the complaint or any claim in the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.