Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled Mar. 15, 2023

Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC

Judge
Lewis Kaplan
Docket
1:21-cv-01317
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Cerveceria Modelo v. CB Brand Strategies, Judge Kaplan received a request to seal confidential material, but the available text does not show a ruling.

Who this affects

The defendants seeking to seal or redact deposition-related material and members of the public seeking access to the filing.

What happened

Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC concerns defendants’ request to seal or redact confidential excerpts from a filing opposing plaintiffs’ request to exclude a witness.

The defendants argued that the material included confidential deposition testimony and that disclosure could cause financial harm outweighing the public’s interest in access to court records. The available text does not identify the court’s decision on the request.

Judge Lewis A. Kaplan’s ruling is not shown in the provided excerpt, so the outcome cannot be determined from this text.

The detailed version

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

Case
Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC · No. 1:21-cv-01317
Judge
Lewis Kaplan
Date
Mar. 15, 2023

Background

The provided document is a letter from counsel for defendants CB Brand Strategies, LLC, Crown Imports LLC, and Compaiiia Cervecera de Coahuila, S. de R.L. de C.V. The letter asks Judge Kaplan for permission to seal or redact portions of a forthcoming opposition letter concerning plaintiffs’ request to exclude Michael Lurie. The requested filing would include excerpts from a fact witness’s deposition, some or all of which had been designated confidential or highly confidential by a party.

Arguments and Legal Standard

The letter states that court records are generally presumed accessible to the public, but that courts may seal records for good cause after balancing public access against the parties’ privacy interests. The defendants argued that sealing or redacting the confidential portions was appropriate because public disclosure would cause financial harm that outweighed the presumption of public access.

Ruling

The available excerpt does not state whether Judge Lewis A. Kaplan granted, denied, or otherwise resolved the request to seal or redact. It therefore does not establish a disposition. The document is dated March 7, 2023, while the supplied case metadata lists March 15, 2023 as the filing date.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.