Jane Street Group, LLC v. Millennium Management LLC
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:24-cv-02783
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Jane Street Group, LLC v. Millennium Management LLC, Judge Engelmayer granted individual defendants’ request to file their answer and counterclaims under seal.
Douglas Schadewald and Daniel Spottiswood, whose answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims were permitted to be filed under seal; Jane Street Group, LLC, which had a pending request to seal parts of its amended complaint; and members of the public seeking access to those filings.
What happened
In Jane Street Group, LLC v. Millennium Management LLC, Douglas Schadewald and Daniel Spottiswood asked permission to file their answer, defenses, and counterclaims under seal.
They said they believed those filings should be public because Jane Street had not disclosed the alleged trade secret and the case filings had described Jane Street’s business only generally. They nevertheless sought sealing while Jane Street’s request to seal parts of its amended complaint remained pending.
Judge Engelmayer granted the request on May 13, 2024. The text does not give additional reasons or specify the duration of the seal.
The detailed version
- Jane Street Group, LLC v. Millennium Management LLC · No. 1:24-cv-02783
- Paul Engelmayer
- May 13, 2024
Request
Douglas Schadewald and Daniel Spottiswood, identified as the individual defendants, sought permission to file their answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims under seal. A filing under seal is not publicly available in the ordinary court docket.
Parties’ Positions
The individual defendants stated that they believed the answer and counterclaims should be public. They argued that Jane Street Group, LLC had not yet disclosed the alleged trade secret at issue and that the filings to that point had described Jane Street’s business activities only generally. They also stated that the public-access interest was especially strong because the answer and counterclaims were pleadings central to the court’s work.
Despite that position, the individual defendants requested sealing as a precaution because Jane Street had a pending request to seal portions of its amended complaint. They said they would confer with Jane Street about any proposed redactions and file a public version of the answer and counterclaims by the close of business on May 14, 2024. They reserved the right to challenge any proposed redactions.
Ruling
The court marked the request “GRANTED” and ordered it on May 13, 2024. Judge Engelmayer’s order, as provided, does not explain the reasons for the ruling or separately specify which portions of the filings must remain sealed.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.