Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Qin

Background

The petitioners—Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership, Huzhou Huihengying Equity Investment Partnership, and Huzhou Huirongsheng Equity Investment Partnership—requested permission to file their reply memorandum in support of a third motion to compel, an order requiring a party to explain possible noncompliance, and a renewed request for contempt with redactions. They also sought to file the unredacted reply under seal, meaning it would not be publicly accessible and could be viewed by the court and Hui Qin.

Request and stated basis

The petitioners said that parts of the reply quoted Qin’s deposition testimony. The testimony had been designated confidential and included statements about Qin’s bank information. Relying on the general presumption that court documents should be publicly accessible, balanced against privacy interests, the petitioners argued that protecting sensitive financial information justified restricting public access. They also pointed to earlier orders allowing certain exhibits to be filed under seal to protect sensitive personal information.

Ruling

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. The court also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at docket entry 235. The opinion does not state any additional conditions governing the redactions or sealing beyond granting the application.