CrossBorder Solutions v. Macias
- Nelson Roman
- 7:20-cv-04877
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
CrossBorder Solutions v. Macias, Gini & OConnell, Judge Roman granted plaintiffs’ request to seal confidential business documents.
The plaintiffs’ identified filings and exhibits are under seal and accessible only to the court and the parties in the case. The order affects CrossBorder Solutions, Inc. n/k/a Exactera Inc., Cross Border Transactions, LLC d/b/a CrossBorder Solutions n/k/a Exactera LLC, Macias, Gini & O’Connell, LLP, and Sanjay Agarwal.
What happened
In CrossBorder Solutions, Inc. n/k/a Exactera Inc. v. Macias, Gini, & OConnell, LLP, the plaintiffs asked to seal amendments to a partial summary-judgment motion, a declaration, and seven exhibits. The materials contained nonpublic information about clients, pricing, renewals, profits, costs, trade secrets, and claimed damages.
The plaintiffs argued that protecting this confidential information outweighed the public’s general right to inspect court documents. Counsel for Macias, Gini & O’Connell, LLP and Sanjay Agarwal consented to the request.
Judge Nelson S. Roman granted the request. He directed the clerk to place the listed documents under seal, 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. 28, 2024
Background
The plaintiffs—CrossBorder Solutions, Inc. n/k/a Exactera Inc. and Cross Border Transactions, LLC d/b/a CrossBorder Solutions n/k/a Exactera LLC—asked for permission to file certain materials under seal. The request concerned amendments to the plaintiffs’ partial summary-judgment motion, the January 19, 2024 declaration of Stephanie Israel, and seven exhibits to that declaration.
The requested materials included internal spreadsheets and email communications containing information about the plaintiffs’ clients, contract pricing, client renewals, profits, costs, and financial analyses. They also included information concerning the trade-secret Master List at issue in the case and the damages the plaintiffs claimed resulted from its theft. The materials were marked highly confidential under the parties’ confidentiality agreement and protective order. Counsel for Macias, Gini & O’Connell, LLP and Sanjay Agarwal consented to the request.
Legal standard
The plaintiffs cited the general presumption that the public may access judicial documents—documents relevant to the court’s work and useful in the judicial process. They argued that the parties’ privacy and confidentiality interests outweighed that presumption. The request also relied on the court’s earlier decisions allowing the plaintiffs to seal similar information about clients, contracts, renewal rates, the trade-secret Master List, and claimed damages.
Ruling
The court granted the plaintiffs’ request to file the identified documents under seal. It directed the clerk to place ECF Nos. 317, 318, and 318-1 through 318-7 under seal, accessible only to the court and the parties. The court also directed the clerk to terminate the motion at ECF No. 352. This order addressed access to documents; the provided text does not decide the underlying claims or the partial-summary-judgment motion.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.