Golden Unicorn Enterprises, Inc. v. Audible, Inc.
- Jesse Furman
- 1:21-cv-07059
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Golden Unicorn v. Audible: Judge Furman temporarily granted redactions of personal information while reserving the final sealing decision.
The order affects Golden Unicorn Enterprises, Inc., Big Dog Books, LLC, Audible, Inc., the individuals whose personal contact information appeared in the exhibit, and public access to the court materials.
What happened
Golden Unicorn Enterprises, Inc. v. Audible, Inc. concerns a request involving an exhibit filed with Audible’s reply supporting its renewed request for penalties over possible destruction of evidence.
The plaintiffs asked to redact precise home addresses and telephone numbers from an exhibit containing initial disclosures, while leaving cities and telephone area codes visible. They also asked the court to keep the unredacted exhibit sealed.
Judge Jesse Furman temporarily granted the motion to seal and said the court would decide whether to keep the materials sealed or redacted when ruling on the underlying motion. The clerk was directed to terminate docket entry 238.
The detailed version
- Golden Unicorn Enterprises, Inc. v. Audible, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-07059
- Jesse Furman
- Mar. 31, 2023
Background
The plaintiffs sought permission for Audible to file a redacted version of an exhibit attached to Audible’s reply supporting its renewed motion for sanctions for spoliation, meaning possible destruction or loss of evidence. The exhibit contained excerpts from the plaintiffs’ initial disclosures. The request concerned docket entry 236-2 and an unredacted version that Audible had filed on March 23, 2023.
Requested Redactions
The proposed redactions covered the street names and numbers in the home addresses of several individuals connected to the plaintiffs, including Golden Unicorn Enterprises’ president and owner Jan Bonthu, its vice president Srikanth Bonthu, former marketing contractor Annette Stone, Sandra Retzlaff, and individuals connected to Big Dog Books, LLC. The plaintiffs also sought to redact the last seven digits of the individuals’ home and cellular telephone numbers while leaving cities of residence and three-digit telephone area codes visible.
Ruling
The court stated that the motion to seal was granted temporarily. It reserved the decision whether to keep the materials sealed or redacted until it decided the underlying motion. The clerk of court was directed to terminate docket entry 238. The opinion does not state a final ruling on whether the redactions or sealing will remain in place.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.