Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 5, 2023

Leitch v. Amazon Services Com LLC f/k/a Amazon Services Com Inc.

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:22-cv-06121
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Leitch v. Amazon Services, Judge Schofield denied Plaintiffs’ sealing motion and ordered the documents unsealed.

Who this affects

Plaintiff, whose request to seal was denied, and the public, because the court ordered the documents at Docket No. 70 unsealed.

What happened

In Leitch v. Amazon Services Com LLC, a plaintiff asked to seal its response to the defendant’s request for permission to file a summary-judgment motion.

An earlier order explained that confidentiality labels alone do not overcome the public’s right to access court documents, including when sensitive business information may be involved. The plaintiff did not submit the revised sealing request the court allowed.

Judge Schofield denied the sealing motion and directed the Clerk to unseal the documents filed at Docket No. 70.

The detailed version

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

Case
Leitch v. Amazon Services Com LLC f/k/a Amazon Services Com Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-06121
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
June 5, 2023

Background

On May 30, 2023, Plaintiff filed a letter motion asking to seal its response to Defendant’s request for permission to file a motion for summary judgment.

Court’s Analysis

The court referred to its June 1, 2023, order, which explained that the parties’ confidentiality designations do not decide whether documents should be sealed. The public’s right to access judicial documents may outweigh competing considerations, such as protecting competitively sensitive information. The June 1 order allowed Plaintiff to refile the sealing request by June 2 with an explanation supporting it. Plaintiff did not refile the request.

Ruling

The court denied the letter motion to seal. It directed the Clerk of Court to unseal the documents filed at Docket No. 70.

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.