CrossBorder Solutions v. Macias
- Nelson Roman
- 7:20-cv-04877
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In CrossBorder Solutions v. Macias, Judge Roman granted defendants’ request to seal specified documents containing confidential business information.
The order affects defendants’ specified court filing, the parties’ access to that filing, and the public’s access to it.
What happened
CrossBorder Solutions, Inc. n/k/a Exactera Inc. v. Macias, Gini, & OConnell, LLP concerns defendants’ request to file a memorandum supporting their summary-judgment motion under seal.
Defendants said the filing contained alleged trade secrets and confidential business information, including client lists, internal notes, tracking information, renewal history, deadlines, and business goals. They argued that disclosure could cause competitive harm and noted that the information had been marked highly confidential under the parties’ protective order. Plaintiffs’ counsel consented.
Judge Nelson S. Roman granted the request. The court directed the clerk to place the specified document under seal, making it accessible only to the court and the parties, and directed the clerk to terminate the sealing motion.
The detailed version
- CrossBorder Solutions v. Macias · No. 7:20-cv-04877
- Nelson Roman
- Feb. 26, 2024
Background
Defendants Macias, Gini, O’Connell, LLP and Sanjay Agarwal asked for permission to file under seal their amended memorandum supporting their motion for summary judgment. The request relied on the parties’ stipulated confidentiality agreement and protective order. Plaintiffs’ counsel consented to the request.
Arguments
Defendants acknowledged that court filings connected to a summary-judgment motion generally carry a strong presumption of public access. They argued that the presumption was overcome because the filing contained alleged trade secrets and confidential business information, including excerpts from or information about CrossBorder’s Master List, internal notes, tracking information, renewal dates and history, internal deadlines and goals for clients and former clients, and other information concerning former clients. Defendants also stated that the parties had marked the information “Highly Confidential” and that disclosure could cause competitive harm.
Ruling
Judge Nelson S. Roman granted defendants’ request to file the indicated documents under seal. The court directed the clerk to place ECF No. 235 under seal, accessible only to the court and the parties, and to terminate the motion at ECF No. 334.
Unclear Document Number
The request identifies defendants’ amended memorandum as ECF No. 335, but the court’s directive refers to ECF No. 235. The opinion text does not explain whether this difference is a typographical error or reflects different documents.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.