Sabre Global Technologies Limited v. Hawaiian Airlines, Inc.

Nature of the Filing

The provided text is a letter from Sabre’s attorneys requesting permission to file under seal or with redactions Sabre’s memorandum opposing Hawaiian’s motion to dismiss. It is not a judicial opinion explaining a decision on the request, and the text does not state that the court granted or denied the motion.

Background

Sabre describes the underlying case as a breach-of-contract action against Hawaiian. Sabre says the dispute involves a Distribution Services Agreement between the parties. Sabre previously sought to file portions of its complaint under seal because they contained or described the Agreement’s terms and the parties’ negotiating history. The letter states that Judge Halpern granted that earlier request and directed Sabre to file a redacted complaint.

Hawaiian later moved to dismiss Sabre’s complaint. Hawaiian filed a request to redact material in its supporting memorandum that would reveal the Agreement’s terms and to file the Agreement itself under seal. The letter states that Sabre then asked to keep those materials under seal, but that the court had not yet ruled on Sabre’s request.

Current Request

Sabre asks to redact portions of its opposition to Hawaiian’s motion to dismiss. The proposed redactions concern information that contains, reveals, or describes the Agreement’s terms and the negotiating history between Sabre and Hawaiian.

Sabre argues that the Agreement is still operative and that its airline contracts contain heavily negotiated and competitively sensitive terms. It specifically identifies terms concerning the flights and fares Hawaiian must provide to Sabre, along with pricing. Sabre says disclosure could give counterparties and competitors information that would disadvantage Sabre in future negotiations and in competition with other airline-distribution companies.

Sabre relies on the general principle that judicial documents are presumed open to the public but may be sealed when narrowly tailored restrictions are essential to protect important interests, including confidential business information. Sabre also points to earlier sealing decisions involving its contracts with airlines.

Court Action Shown in the Text

The text includes filing instructions stating that the parties were ordered to submit an unredacted copy with proposed redactions highlighted. It does not include an order granting or denying Sabre’s current request to redact its opposition. The disposition of the request is therefore unclear from the provided text.