Wenger S.A. v. OLIVET INTERNATIONAL INC.
- Subramanian
- 1:20-cv-01107
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Wenger S.A. v. Olivet International, Judge Subramanian ordered redactions protecting sensitive business information in a trademark license agreement.
The ruling affects former defendant Swisstech IP Co., LLC and the other entities involved in the trademark license agreement, including Galaxy Brands LLC and Walmart, by keeping specified commercially sensitive information from public disclosure.
What happened
In Wenger S.A. v. Olivet International, former defendant Swisstech IP Co., LLC asked the court to redact portions of a trademark license agreement and amendment involving Galaxy Brands LLC, Swisstech, and Walmart. The documents contained nonpublic pricing, royalty, valuation, indemnification, audit, approval, and confidentiality terms.
Swisstech argued that public disclosure could harm the contracting parties’ competitive and financial interests. It also said the request was limited to commercially sensitive information and noted that the court had previously sealed the license agreement in its entirety.
The court ordered the requested redactions. Judge Arun Subramanian signed the order on May 17, 2024.
The detailed version
- Wenger S.A. v. OLIVET INTERNATIONAL INC. · No. 1:20-cv-01107
- Subramanian
- May 17, 2024
Background
Former defendant Swisstech IP Co., LLC (identified as “STIP” in the letter) submitted a letter motion seeking to redact limited portions of a trademark license agreement and an associated amendment. The agreement involved Galaxy Brands LLC, which the letter identifies as STIP’s predecessor-in-interest, STIP, and Walmart. The request followed the court’s earlier order concerning Olivet International Inc.’s motion to seal.
The requested redactions covered sensitive and proprietary business information, including pricing information, royalty structures, valuations, indemnification terms, audit provisions, approval processes, and confidentiality requirements. STIP argued that disclosure could cause significant competitive and financial harm, including harm to the entities’ future contracting positions. The letter also stated that the court had previously sealed the trademark license agreement in its entirety.
Court’s ruling
The court ordered the requested redactions, as shown by the court’s “SO ORDERED” endorsement. The ruling preserved the identified commercially sensitive information from public disclosure. Judge Arun Subramanian dated the order May 17, 2024.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.