Mitsugi v. Jung
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:22-cv-08025
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Mitsugi v. Jung, Judge Schofield denied summary judgment as moot and granted sealing of personal information after settlement.
The parties and their children, whose personal identifying information appeared in the summary-judgment materials, and members of the public seeking access to those materials.
What happened
In Mitsugi v. Jung, Respondent moved for summary judgment and asked to seal personal identifying information in the supporting papers. The information concerned the parties and their children, including birth dates, addresses, passport numbers, phone numbers, and email addresses.
The parties reached a settlement in principle, and the court later approved their stipulation of dismissal. Because of that settlement, the court denied Respondent’s summary-judgment motion as moot, meaning it no longer needed to decide that motion.
Judge Schofield granted Respondent’s motion to seal portions of the summary-judgment record. The court directed the Clerk to close the two related motions.
The detailed version
- Mitsugi v. Jung · No. 1:22-cv-08025
- Lorna Schofield
- July 7, 2023
Background
Respondent moved for summary judgment on June 2, 2023. In connection with that motion, Respondent also asked to file parts of the supporting papers and summary-judgment record under seal. The information consisted of personal identifying information for the parties and their children, including dates of birth, home addresses, passport numbers, telephone numbers, and email addresses.
The court noted that judicial documents generally carry a presumption of public access, but that access is not absolute. Privacy interests can outweigh that presumption, and a federal rule requires redaction of certain identifying information.
Settlement and Rulings
The parties reached a settlement in principle. An earlier order had postponed all deadlines, and a later order approved the parties’ stipulation of dismissal.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered that Respondent’s motion for summary judgment was DENIED as moot. The court also ordered that Respondent’s motion to file portions of the summary-judgment record under seal was GRANTED. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motions at Docket Nos. 70 and 72.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.