Tang Capital Partners, LP v. BRC Inc.

Background

Tang Capital submitted a letter-motion concerning materials it planned to file with its summary-judgment and expert-evidence motions. The materials included deposition excerpts and discovery documents produced by Tang Capital, BRC Inc., and third parties.

Requested relief

For its own documents, Tang Capital requested permission to file public versions with minor redactions for sensitive business information, including account numbers, the identities of counterparties, and the names of investments not involved in the case. For BRC’s and third parties’ documents, Tang Capital requested permission to file under seal, temporarily, discovery materials designated “Confidential” or “Attorney’s Eyes Only” under the court’s protective order, and to redact quotations from those materials in its briefs.

Tang Capital proposed that, after briefing was completed on May 31, 2024, the parties have two weeks to review the filings, confer about which materials should be publicly refiled, and seek permission to keep materials sealed permanently when appropriate. It also proposed notifying third parties whose confidential discovery materials were filed so they could seek permanent sealing.

Ruling

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger granted the request to file materials under seal provisionally. For both parties’ motions, the court ordered the parties to follow the proposed schedule and plan for addressing redactions after briefing was complete. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the letter motions at Docket Entries 142 and 154.

Effect of the order

The order addressed temporary sealing and the later review of redactions. It did not decide whether any material should remain permanently sealed, and the text provided does not address the merits of the underlying dispute or the pending motions.