Accent Delight International Ltd. v. Sotheby's

S.D. New York

Accent Delight International Ltd. v. Sotheby's

DecidedApril 22, 2021

Docket1:18-cv-09011

StatusUnknown

This text of Accent Delight International Ltd. v. Sotheby's (Accent Delight International Ltd. v. Sotheby's) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Accent Delight International Ltd. v. Sotheby's, (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

Arnold □ Porter orga +1 212.836.7922 Direct Sara.Shudofsky@arnoldporter.com

April 21, 2021 VIA ECF The motion at ECF No. 262 is GRANTED temporarily. □□ The Honorable Jesse M. Furman Court will address the propriety of sealing when deciding t United States District Judge underlying motions. The Clerk of Court is directed to Southern District of New York terminate ECF No. 262. SO ORDERED. 40 Centre Street, Room 2202 New York, New York 10007 Re: Accent Delight Int’! Ltd. et al. v. Sotheby’s, 18 Civ. 9011 Dear Judge Furman: April 22, 2

We write respectfully on behalf of Defendants Sotheby’s and Sotheby’s, Inc. (collectively, “Sotheby’s”) pursuant to Section 7(C)(i11) of Your Honor’s Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases and paragraph 4.5 of the February 28, 2020 Amended Protective Order (the “Protective Order”), see ECF No. 145 4 4.5, to request permission to publicly file a redacted version of Sotheby’s April 21, 2021 letter, accompanied by slip sheets instead of the exhibits attached thereto. Sotheby’s will file under seal an unredacted version of that letter, along with the exhibits, contemporaneously with the filing of this letter. Sotheby’s submits this letter because the above-referenced documents quote, refer to, or are documents that Plaintiffs designated as confidential pursuant to paragraph 2.2 of the Protective Order or filed under seal at ECF No. 252. However, in light of the parties’ reliance on these documents and their relevance to the dispute before the Court, and because the exhibits and the information contained in the letter have already been made available to various governmental authorities, Sotheby’s respectfully submits that these documents qualify as judicial documents to which a strong presumption of public access attaches that is not outweighed by any countervailing interest in maintaining them under seal. See Accent Delight Int’l Ltd. v. Sotheby’s, 394 F. Supp. 3d 399, 417 (S.D.N.Y. 2019). We thank the Court for its consideration of this letter.

Respectfully, /s/ Sara L. Shudofsky Sara L. Shudofsky ce: All counsel of record (via ECF) | Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP 250 West 55th Street | New York, NY 10019-9710 | www.arnoldporter.com

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Arnold □ Porter orga +1 212.836.7922 Direct Sara.Shudofsky@arnoldporter.com

April 21, 2021 VIA ECF The motion at ECF No. 262 is GRANTED temporarily. □□ The Honorable Jesse M. Furman Court will address the propriety of sealing when deciding t United States District Judge underlying motions. The Clerk of Court is directed to Southern District of New York terminate ECF No. 262. SO ORDERED. 40 Centre Street, Room 2202 New York, New York 10007 Re: Accent Delight Int’! Ltd. et al. v. Sotheby’s, 18 Civ. 9011 Dear Judge Furman: April 22, 2

We write respectfully on behalf of Defendants Sotheby’s and Sotheby’s, Inc. (collectively, “Sotheby’s”) pursuant to Section 7(C)(i11) of Your Honor’s Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases and paragraph 4.5 of the February 28, 2020 Amended Protective Order (the “Protective Order”), see ECF No. 145 4 4.5, to request permission to publicly file a redacted version of Sotheby’s April 21, 2021 letter, accompanied by slip sheets instead of the exhibits attached thereto. Sotheby’s will file under seal an unredacted version of that letter, along with the exhibits, contemporaneously with the filing of this letter. Sotheby’s submits this letter because the above-referenced documents quote, refer to, or are documents that Plaintiffs designated as confidential pursuant to paragraph 2.2 of the Protective Order or filed under seal at ECF No. 252. However, in light of the parties’ reliance on these documents and their relevance to the dispute before the Court, and because the exhibits and the information contained in the letter have already been made available to various governmental authorities, Sotheby’s respectfully submits that these documents qualify as judicial documents to which a strong presumption of public access attaches that is not outweighed by any countervailing interest in maintaining them under seal. See Accent Delight Int’l Ltd. v. Sotheby’s, 394 F. Supp. 3d 399, 417 (S.D.N.Y. 2019). We thank the Court for its consideration of this letter.

Respectfully, /s/ Sara L. Shudofsky Sara L. Shudofsky ce: All counsel of record (via ECF) | Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP 250 West 55th Street | New York, NY 10019-9710 | www.arnoldporter.com

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Accent Delight International Ltd. v. Sotheby's, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/accent-delight-international-ltd-v-sothebys-nysd-2021.