Ornua Foods North America, Inc. v. Abbey Specialty Foods, LLC
- Clarke
- 1:23-cv-01212
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Ornua Foods v. Abbey Specialty Foods, Judge Clarke temporarily granted Ornua’s request to seal or redact confidential business information.
The order affects Ornua, Abbey, non-party Circana, the parties’ attorneys, court personnel, and public access to ECF Nos. 49, 51, and 52.
What happened
In Ornua Foods North America, Inc. v. Abbey Specialty Foods, LLC, Ornua asked to file parts of its opposition papers under seal or with redactions. The request concerned sales, financial, market-share, and brand-awareness information, including information obtained from Circana.
Ornua said the information was confidential and competitively sensitive. Counsel for Abbey consented to filing the materials under seal or with redactions.
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke temporarily granted the sealing request. She directed the Clerk to terminate ECF No. 45 and seal ECF Nos. 49, 51, and 52, with access restricted to the parties’ attorneys and court personnel; the court will decide whether the materials remain sealed or redacted when it rules on the underlying motion.
The detailed version
- Ornua Foods North America, Inc. v. Abbey Specialty Foods, LLC · No. 1:23-cv-01212
- Clarke
- Feb. 14, 2024
Background
Plaintiffs Ornua Foods North America, Inc. and Ornua Co-Operative Limited asked for permission to file certain opposition materials under seal or with redactions. The materials concerned Abbey Specialty Foods, LLC’s renewed motion to dismiss or, alternatively, for summary judgment. Ornua sought protection for portions of its legal memorandum and factual statements, as well as the entire confidential declaration of Kate Saul.
The requested protection covered Ornua’s sales and financial information, market share, and brand-awareness data. The request also involved nonpublic information obtained under a subscription contract with Circana, which had requested that the information be sealed. Counsel for Abbey consented to the proposed sealing or redaction.
Court’s Analysis
The court recognized that the public’s right to access judicial documents is not absolute. It explained that confidential business information, including sales, revenue, marketing, pricing, and other nonpublic commercial information, may justify sealing when closure is narrowly tailored to protect a higher value. The court’s order indicates that it accepted the request temporarily while reserving a final decision until it considers the underlying motion.
Ruling
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke temporarily granted the letter-motion to seal. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF No. 45 and seal ECF Nos. 49, 51, and 52. Access was restricted to attorneys appearing for the parties and court personnel. The court stated that it would assess whether to keep the materials sealed or redacted when deciding the underlying motion.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.