Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled Jan. 30, 2023

In re Omnicom Group. Inc. ERISA Litigation

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:20-cv-04141
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
ErisaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In re Omnicom Group Inc. ERISA Litigation: Defendants asked to seal facts; Judge McMahon’s ruling is not included.

Who this affects

The defendants and plaintiffs in the ERISA litigation, and the public’s access to the Joint Stipulation of Facts.

What happened

In In re Omnicom Group Inc. ERISA Litigation, the defendants asked the Southern District of New York for permission to file a joint statement of facts under seal before trial.

The defendants proposed redacting proprietary information from Mercer presentations and pricing information related to a recordkeeping-fee bidding process. They said the plaintiffs did not object and that both redacted public and sealed versions would be filed.

The provided text contains the request but no ruling by Judge Colleen McMahon. It therefore does not show whether the request to seal was granted or denied.

The detailed version

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

Case
In re Omnicom Group. Inc. ERISA Litigation · No. 1:20-cv-04141
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Jan. 30, 2023

Document and request

The provided text is a January 27, 2023 letter from counsel for Omnicom Group Inc., the Board of Directors of Omnicom Group Inc., and the Administrative Committee of the Omnicom Group Retirement Savings Plan. The letter asks the court for permission to file the parties’ Joint Stipulation of Facts under seal before trial.

Proposed redactions

The defendants said they had reviewed the Joint Stipulation of Facts line by line and wanted to redact two categories of information: proprietary information in Mercer presentations to the Administrative Committee and pricing information from a request-for-proposals process seeking recordkeeping-fee proposals from five recordkeepers. The defendants stated that the plaintiffs did not object to the proposed redactions.

The defendants said they would file a publicly available version with sensitive information redacted and a sealed version showing the proposed redactions. They asked the court to direct the electronic filing clerk to seal the Joint Stipulation of Facts. They also said they would revise the filing if the court later changed the defendants’ requests concerning other sealing motions.

Disposition

The provided text is a party’s letter motion, not a court order. It does not state that Judge Colleen McMahon granted, denied, or otherwise resolved the sealing request. The court’s disposition cannot be determined from the provided text.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.