Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 5, 2023

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Virtu Financial Inc.

Judge
John Koeltl
Docket
1:23-cv-08072
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureEvidence
In one sentence

In Securities and Exchange Commission v. Virtu Financial, Judge Koeltl granted Virtu’s request to file four confidential exhibits under seal.

Who this affects

Virtu Financial, Inc. and Virtu Americas LLC, whose four exhibits may be filed under seal, and members of the public seeking access to those exhibits.

What happened

In Securities and Exchange Commission v. Virtu Financial, Inc. and Virtu Americas LLC, the defendants asked to file four exhibits under seal while supporting their motion to dismiss the Securities and Exchange Commission’s complaint.

The exhibits contained non-public information from Virtu’s internal policies and training manuals, including commercially sensitive business information and information about security practices. The Securities and Exchange Commission consented to the request.

Judge Koeltl granted the application. The order allowed the four exhibits to be filed under seal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Virtu Financial Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-08072
Judge
John Koeltl
Date
Dec. 5, 2023

Background

Virtu Financial, Inc. and Virtu Americas LLC asked the court for permission to file four exhibits under seal in support of their motion to dismiss the Securities and Exchange Commission’s complaint. The defendants described the exhibits as containing non-public, proprietary, and commercially sensitive information from Virtu’s internal policies and training manuals. They also said the exhibits contained information about Virtu’s information-security practices. The Securities and Exchange Commission consented to the request.

Request to Seal

The filing relied on the presumption that judicial documents should generally be publicly accessible, while arguing that confidential business information may justify restricting access. The defendants stated that public disclosure could place Virtu at a competitive disadvantage and reveal confidential information about its business operations and security practices.

The defendants also argued that the request was narrowly tailored. They were not seeking to redact references and quotations from the exhibits that appeared in the complaint and motion-to-dismiss briefing. They said most of the information in the exhibits was not relevant to the claims or the motion and had little or no public interest in disclosure.

Ruling

Judge John G. Koeltl granted the application and permitted the defendants to file the four exhibits under seal. The text provided does not include a merits ruling on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s claims or on the defendants’ motion to dismiss.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.