Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 9, 2024

Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Hui Qin

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:24-cv-02219
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePreliminary Injunction
In one sentence

In Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Qin, Judge Failla granted a request to seal specified filings.

Who this affects

Third-party Duo “Emma” Liu, the parties to the case, and members of the public seeking access to docket entries 38, 39, and 40.

What happened

In Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Hui Qin, third-party Duo “Emma” Liu asked the court to seal redacted copies of documents related to petitioners’ request for a preliminary injunction.

Liu’s lawyer said the documents contained confidential information, that Liu was not the person who owed the judgment, and that an ongoing criminal investigation supported restricting public access. The request also noted that other case filings had been sealed.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. She directed the clerk to keep docket entries 38, 39, and 40 sealed and available only to the court and the parties, and directed the clerk to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 34.

The detailed version

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

Case
Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Hui Qin · No. 1:24-cv-02219
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
Apr. 9, 2024

Background

Third-party Duo “Emma” Liu submitted a request to seal documents in this case. The request concerned redacted copies of Liu’s opposition to petitioners’ motion for a preliminary injunction, declarations and attached exhibits, and a memorandum of law opposing that motion.

Request

Liu’s counsel acknowledged the presumption that judicial documents should generally be open to the public. Counsel argued that the documents contained confidential information, that Liu was not the judgment-debtor but a third party whose private affairs had been drawn into the dispute, and that an ongoing criminal investigation provided additional support for sealing. The request also stated that other docket entries had been sealed for presumably similar reasons.

Ruling

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. The court directed the clerk to maintain docket entries 38, 39, and 40 under seal, viewable only by the court and the parties. The court also directed the clerk to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 34. The endorsement does not provide a separate explanation of the court’s balancing of public access against privacy interests.

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.