Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 9, 2023

CrossBorder Solutions v. Macias

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:20-cv-04877
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In CrossBorder Solutions v. Macias, Gini, & OConnell, Judge Roman granted the plaintiffs’ request to seal specified filings.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs, the defendants, and public access to the court record. The specified filings are accessible only to the court and the parties.

What happened

CrossBorder Solutions, Inc. n/k/a Exactera Inc. asked the court to seal parts of its opposition brief and Exhibits A through K. The materials included information about clients, costs, renewal rates, a trade-secret client list, and claimed damages.

The court found that the materials contained confidential and proprietary non-public information. It ruled that the parties’ interests in protecting that information outweighed the usual presumption that judicial documents should be publicly accessible.

Judge Nelson S. Roman granted the request and directed the clerk to place the specified filings under seal, accessible only to the court and the parties. The court also directed the clerk to terminate the sealing motion.

The detailed version

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

Case
CrossBorder Solutions v. Macias · No. 7:20-cv-04877
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
Aug. 9, 2023

Background

The plaintiffs requested permission to file portions of their opposition brief and Exhibits A through K under seal. The request concerned materials submitted in connection with the plaintiffs’ opposition to the defendants’ motion to partially preclude a declaration. The requested materials included emails, arbitration filings, interrogatories and responses, and CrossBorder’s master client list.

The plaintiffs stated that the materials were designated confidential or highly confidential under the parties’ stipulated confidentiality agreement and protective order. They included non-public information about CrossBorder’s clients, costs, renewal rates, its trade-secret master client list, and the amount of damages it claimed from the theft of that list. The plaintiffs also stated that the defendants consented to the request.

Court’s Analysis

The court applied the common-law presumption favoring public access to judicial documents. It balanced that presumption against competing interests, including the privacy interests of parties resisting disclosure. The court determined that the interests in protecting the confidential and proprietary information outweighed the presumption of public access.

Ruling

Judge Nelson S. Roman granted the plaintiffs’ request to file the identified documents under seal. The court directed the clerk to place ECF Nos. 291, 292, 292-1 through 292-10 under seal, accessible only to the court and the parties. The court also directed the clerk to terminate the motion at ECF No. 290.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.