Sterling and Wilson Solar Solutions, Inc. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:23-cv-05711
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Sterling and Wilson Solar Solutions v. JPMorgan Chase, Judge Caproni temporarily restricted exhibits, requiring a redacted filing or unsealing.
Sterling and Wilson Solar Solutions, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., and members of the public seeking access to the filed exhibits.
What happened
Sterling and Wilson Solar Solutions, Inc. asked the court to temporarily seal two exhibits containing a third-party engineering, procurement, and construction agreement marked confidential in some places.
The court found that the materials were judicial documents connected to the plaintiff’s request for a temporary restraining order, so the public had a presumptive right to access them. It concluded that redaction could protect sensitive business information without sealing the materials completely.
Judge Valerie Caproni temporarily granted the sealing request. She ordered the documents restricted to the court and parties, but provided that they would be unsealed in full by July 7, 2023, unless the plaintiff submitted a revised request to file a redacted version by that date.
The detailed version
- Sterling and Wilson Solar Solutions, Inc. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. · No. 1:23-cv-05711
- Valerie Caproni
- July 5, 2023
Background
Sterling and Wilson Solar Solutions, Inc. asked the court to conditionally seal Exhibit A to its complaint and Exhibit B-1 to a declaration filed in support of the case. The exhibits were copies of a third-party engineering, procurement, and construction agreement, some pages of which were marked “CONFIDENTIAL.” The plaintiff stated that it had tried to contact JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. about the issue, but that the defendant had not yet retained counsel when the request was filed.
Court’s Analysis
The court determined that the document directly concerned the plaintiff’s request for a temporary restraining order. It therefore qualified as a judicial document, meaning a document filed in court that is subject to a presumptive right of public access. The court concluded that the confidentiality interests asserted did not outweigh the public’s right to access the document in its entirety. It found that redaction, rather than complete sealing, could adequately protect sensitive business information.
Ruling
The court temporarily granted the sealing request. It directed the Clerk of Court to restrict viewing of the documents filed at Docket 1 to the court and the parties. The documents would be unsealed in their entirety by July 7, 2023, if Sterling and Wilson Solar Solutions did not submit a revised request to file a redacted version in accordance with Judge Caproni’s individual practices by that date.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.