Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 15, 2024

Ultra Records, LLC v. Ultra International Music Publishing, LLC

Judge
Subramanian
Docket
1:22-cv-09667
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedureEvidence
In one sentence

In Ultra Records v. Ultra International Music Publishing, Judge Subramanian granted redactions of confidential business information and expert rates.

Who this affects

Ultra International Music Publishing, LLC’s confidential business, financial, and expert-rate information in the specified exhibits was allowed to remain redacted from public view.

What happened

In Ultra Records, LLC v. Ultra International Music Publishing, LLC, Ultra International Music Publishing asked the court to allow limited redactions in exhibits filed by Ultra Records in support of a motion about expert testimony.

The requested redactions covered information about Ultra International Music Publishing’s song catalog, artists, profits, losses, and the hourly rates paid to its experts. The company said this information was confidential and commercially sensitive.

Judge Arun Subramanian granted the request. He directed the Clerk of Court to close docket entry 73.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ultra Records, LLC v. Ultra International Music Publishing, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-09667
Judge
Subramanian
Date
May 15, 2024

Background

Ultra International Music Publishing, LLC asked the court to permit limited redactions—blacking out portions of documents before public filing—in exhibits submitted by Ultra Records, LLC. The exhibits supported Ultra Records’ motion to exclude some expert opinions. The requested redactions covered references to Ultra International Music Publishing’s song catalog and artists, financial information concerning profits and losses, and the hourly rates paid to certain expert witnesses.

Parties’ Positions

Ultra International Music Publishing argued that the information was highly sensitive and confidential business or financial information. It also argued that the expert hourly rates should remain restricted from public view. The opinion states that the company acknowledged the general presumption favoring public access to judicial documents but sought protection for the specified portions. The opinion does not provide a separate response from Ultra Records.

Ruling

Judge Arun Subramanian granted the request. The order directed the Clerk of Court to close docket entry 73. The opinion does not state additional reasoning beyond the order granting the requested limited redactions.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.