Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 28, 2024

Chenming Holdings Limited v. John Does 1-10

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:24-cv-00935
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Chenming Holdings v. John Does 1-10, Judge Failla granted Chenming’s request for a confidentiality order to obtain subpoenaed information identifying defendants.

Who this affects

Chenming Holdings (Hong Kong) Limited, Citibank, N.A., and the unidentified John Doe defendants, because the order concerns discovery intended to identify and serve those defendants.

What happened

Chenming Holdings (Hong Kong) Limited asked the court for a confidentiality order so Citibank could respond to a subpoena seeking information that might identify the John Doe defendants. The court had previously approved expedited discovery from several non-party banks.

Citibank had refused to produce documents without a confidentiality or protective order. The court granted Chenming’s application and stated that it would separately enter Chenming’s proposed order. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 16.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla issued the order on March 28, 2024. The order concerns discovery involving Citibank and information needed to identify and serve the unnamed defendants.

The detailed version

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

Case
Chenming Holdings Limited v. John Does 1-10 · No. 1:24-cv-00935
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
Mar. 28, 2024

Background

Chenming Holdings (Hong Kong) Limited asked the court to enter a discovery confidentiality order. Chenming had previously sought expedited discovery from several non-party banks to obtain information that could identify the John Doe defendants and allow Chenming to serve them with process. The court granted that request and approved the subpoenas.

Chenming served a subpoena on Citibank, N.A. Citibank refused to produce responsive documents unless the court entered a confidentiality or protective order. A protective order is a court order that limits how specified discovery material may be disclosed or used. Because the defendants had not yet been identified, Chenming said it could not confer with them about such an order.

Ruling

The court granted Chenming’s application for a Discovery Confidentiality Order. The court stated that it would separately enter Chenming’s proposed order. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 16.

Effect

The ruling facilitates Chenming’s subpoenaed discovery from Citibank and is intended to help Chenming obtain information identifying the unnamed defendants. The opinion does not state that Citibank produced the documents or that the John Doe defendants were identified. Judge Katherine Polk Failla issued the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.