Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Qin
- Katherine Failla
- 1:21-cv-09221
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan v. Qin, Judge Failla granted the redaction request and ordered docket entries 427 and 428 sealed.
The petitioners, respondents, the parties’ confidential information, and public access to docket entries 427 and 428.
What happened
In Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Qin, the petitioners asked to file a legal memorandum, declaration, and three exhibits with redactions. They said the materials contained confidential deposition testimony, discovery documents, sensitive financial information, and personal information.
The petitioners argued that protecting this business and personal information outweighed the public’s general right to access court records. The court granted the application.
Judge Failla directed the Clerk of Court to keep docket entries 427 and 428 under seal, available only to the court and the parties. She also directed the Clerk to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 425.
The detailed version
- Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Qin · No. 1:21-cv-09221
- Katherine Failla
- May 3, 2024
Request
The petitioners requested permission to file a memorandum supporting their motion for an order to aid enforcement, a declaration, and Exhibits 1, 2, and 4 with redactions. They relied on the court’s individual rules and a stipulated protective order.
Reasons Given
The petitioners said the materials included deposition testimony designated as confidential and documents from discovery marked confidential under the protective order. They also said the documents contained sensitive financial information and respondents’ personal information. The request acknowledged the general presumption that judicial records should be publicly accessible but argued that the privacy interests involved outweighed that presumption.
Court’s Action
The court granted the application. It directed the Clerk of Court to maintain docket entries 427 and 428 under seal, viewable only by the court and the parties. It further directed the Clerk to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 425. The order addressed access to and filing of documents; the text provided does not decide the underlying dispute.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.