Frontier Airlines, Inc. v. AMCK Aviation Holdings Ireland Limited
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:22-cv-02943
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Frontier Airlines v. AMCK Aviation, Judge Engelmayer granted Frontier’s motion to seal commercially sensitive portions of an agreement.
Frontier Airlines, the other parties to the litigation, and members of the public seeking access to the agreement filed with the court.
What happened
Frontier Airlines asked the court to seal parts of Exhibit 3 to a declaration supporting its request for emergency relief against certain aircraft owner trustees. The exhibit was a March 2020 agreement between Frontier and AMCK Aviation Holdings Ireland Limited.
Frontier’s proposed redactions covered aircraft pricing, long-term fleet plans, and other business-strategy terms. Frontier said public disclosure could put it at a competitive disadvantage, while the portions on which it relied remained public.
The court granted the motion to seal. Judge Paul A. Engelmayer entered the order on June 8, 2023.
The detailed version
- Frontier Airlines, Inc. v. AMCK Aviation Holdings Ireland Limited · No. 1:22-cv-02943
- Paul Engelmayer
- June 8, 2023
Background
Frontier filed an application seeking emergency relief against Wells Fargo Trust Company, N.A. and UMB Bank, N.A., acting as owner trustees for aircraft leased to Frontier. The application concerned contractual remedies connected to an alleged breach of lease agreements involved in the litigation.
Motion to Seal
Frontier asked the court to seal Exhibit 3 to the declaration of Paul Lambert. The exhibit was a March 2020 Framework Agreement between Frontier and AMCK Aviation Holdings Ireland Limited. Frontier submitted a partially redacted version of the agreement.
The proposed redactions covered aircraft pricing, Frontier’s long-term fleet plans, and other commercially sensitive business-strategy terms. Frontier argued that disclosure could place it at a competitive disadvantage. It also noted that the portions of the agreement on which it relied remained unredacted. The letter cited the strong presumption of public access to court filings and decisions allowing narrowly tailored redactions for sensitive business information.
Ruling
The court granted Frontier’s motion to seal. The opinion text does not provide additional reasoning beyond the order granting the request.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.