Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 2, 2023

SS&C Technologies Holdings, Inc. v. Arcesium LLC

Judge
Ona Wang
Docket
1:22-cv-02009
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In SS&C Technologies Holdings v. Arcesium, Judge Wang granted the request to seal privilege and deposition-topic letters, subject to later unsealing.

Who this affects

SS&C Technologies Holdings, Inc., Advent Software Inc., and Arcesium LLC, whose specified letters and attachments may remain sealed; members of the public seeking access to those documents may be affected by the sealing order.

What happened

SS&C Technologies Holdings, Inc. and Advent Software Inc. v. Arcesium LLC concerns the parties’ joint request to file certain letters and attachments under seal. The materials addressed disputes about legal privilege and topics for organizational depositions.

The parties said the deposition-topic letters referred to information SS&C had designated confidential, including alleged trade secrets. The court had already approved sealing the privilege letters and had previously sealed similar information.

Judge Wang granted the application. The court left open the possibility of partially or completely unsealing the documents after a decision resolving the case, whether that decision is final or interim.

The detailed version

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

Case
SS&C Technologies Holdings, Inc. v. Arcesium LLC · No. 1:22-cv-02009
Judge
Ona Wang
Date
Aug. 2, 2023

What the parties requested

Arcesium and SS&C jointly asked to file under seal supplemental letter briefs and related attachments concerning two discovery disputes: privilege and topics for Rule 30(b)(6) depositions. Rule 30(b)(6) allows a party to designate an organization to provide testimony through one or more representatives on specified topics.

Basis for sealing

The request stated that the Rule 30(b)(6) letters referred to material SS&C had designated confidential under the protective order. The letters were expected to include SS&C’s trade-secret supplements, which SS&C had designated at the highest confidentiality level permitted by that order. Arcesium did not concede that the information actually constituted trade secrets but agreed that information of this type can overcome the usual presumption favoring public access to court documents.

The opinion states that the court had already granted the request to seal the privilege letters at a July 18, 2023 conference. It also states that the court had previously granted a request to seal similar information.

Ruling

Judge Wang granted the application to file the letters and related attachments under seal. The order expressly states that the sealing was granted without prejudice to partially or wholly unsealing the documents after a dispositive decision—that is, a decision resolving the case or a portion of it—whether final or interim.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.