Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:21-cv-01317
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico v. CB Brand Strategies, Judge Kaplan approved defendants’ request to seal or redact confidential material in a court filing.
The defendants who requested the sealing or redaction, the other parties whose privacy interests may be implicated, and members of the public seeking access to the court filing and related exhibits.
What happened
Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC concerns the defendants’ request to seal or redact parts of a letter and related exhibits that they planned to file in the case.
The defendants argued that the requested information was confidential and that the parties’ privacy interests outweighed the public’s general right to inspect court records. They cited the court’s authority to balance public access against privacy interests.
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan ordered the requested sealing or redaction. The opinion does not identify the specific information or exhibits covered by the order.
The detailed version
- Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC · No. 1:21-cv-01317
- Lewis Kaplan
- Mar. 15, 2023
Background
Defendants CB Brand Strategies, LLC, Crown Imports LLC, and Compania Cervecera de Coahuila, S. de R.L. de C.V. asked the court for permission to seal or redact portions of a forthcoming letter and related exhibit or exhibits. The letter was to be filed under the court’s December 19, 2022 order. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or identify the particular information the defendants sought to protect.
Legal standard
The court recognized a presumption that judicial documents are open to the public. It also stated that courts have discretion to determine whether good cause exists to overcome that presumption. The relevant inquiry balances the public’s interest in access against the parties’ privacy interests. The defendants argued that this balance favored sealing or redacting confidential portions of the letter and related exhibit or exhibits.
Ruling
The court’s “SO ORDERED” endorsement followed the defendants’ request and argument that the balance favored protection of confidential information. The court therefore ordered the requested sealing or redaction. The opinion does not specify the precise portions to be sealed or redacted, and it does not state whether the materials would be sealed entirely or only partially redacted.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.