Baring Industries, Inc. v. 3 BP Property Owner LLC
- John Koeltl
- 1:19-cv-02829
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Baring Industries v. 3 BP Property Owner, Judge Koeltl granted Baring Industries’ request to seal its financial statement supporting a stay request.
Baring Industries, Inc., whose financial statement was sought to be sealed, and members of the public seeking access to that filing; 3 BP Property Owner LLC was the opposing defendant identified in the application.
What happened
In Baring Industries, Inc. v. 3 BP Property Owner LLC, Baring Industries asked the Southern District of New York to seal a financial statement it filed as Exhibit 3. The statement concerned the company’s assets and liabilities and supported its request to pause enforcement of a judgment while an appeal was pending.
Baring Industries argued that public disclosure could cause commercial harm, including harm from revealing profit information. It also argued that sealing would not prejudice 3 BP Property Owner LLC because that defendant had already won summary judgment and the financial statement was not relevant to the disputed issues.
Judge John G. Koeltl granted the application to seal the financial statement. The opinion text does not provide additional details about the scope or duration of the sealing order.
The detailed version
- Baring Industries, Inc. v. 3 BP Property Owner LLC · No. 1:19-cv-02829
- John Koeltl
- Dec. 16, 2022
Background
Baring Industries filed a letter application asking the court to seal its current financial statement, identified as Exhibit 3 to a declaration submitted in support of Baring Industries’ request to stay enforcement of a November 17, 2022 judgment while an appeal was pending. The statement contained information about Baring Industries’ assets and liabilities.
Baring Industries argued that disclosure would create a real risk of commercial and competitive harm, including by revealing profit information. It cited a prior Southern District of New York decision recognizing confidential business information as a possible basis for sealing. Baring Industries also stated that it had met and conferred with counsel for 3 BP Property Owner LLC, but that counsel had not given unconditional consent to the request when the application was filed.
Baring Industries further argued that sealing would not prejudice 3 BP Property Owner LLC because that defendant had already prevailed on a motion for summary judgment and obtained a judgment without the financial statement being relevant to the issues disputed in the case.
Ruling
The court’s order states: “APPLICATION GRANTED” and “SO ORDERED.” Judge John G. Koeltl therefore granted Baring Industries’ application to seal the financial statement. The provided text does not state any additional limitations, duration, or other terms of the sealing order.
Disposition
The sealing application was granted. This was an ancillary access-to-court-records ruling; the provided text does not decide the underlying dispute or describe the court’s reasoning for the earlier summary-judgment decision.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.