Didonato v. GS Services Limited Partnership

S.D. New York

Didonato v. GS Services Limited Partnership

DecidedJanuary 19, 2021

Docket1:20-cv-02154-LGS

StatusUnknown

This text of Didonato v. GS Services Limited Partnership (Didonato v. GS Services Limited Partnership) 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

Didonato v. GS Services Limited Partnership, (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

USONUITTEHDE RSTNA DTIESST RDIICSTT ROIFC TN ECWOU YROTR K --------------------------------------------------------------X : FRANCIS DIDONATO, : Plaintiff, : 20 Civ. 2154 (LGS) : -against- : ORDER : GC SERVICES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, et al., : Defendants. : ------------------------------------------------------------- X LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge: WHEREAS, on January 12, 2021, Plaintiff filed under seal, a letter requesting to modify the Protective Order in this action. Dkt. No. 105. WHEREAS, on January 12, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion to seal the January 12, 2021, letter at Docket No. 105. Dkt. Nos. 102, 103. It is hereby ORDERED that, by January 25, 2021, Defendants and non-party Navient Solutions, LLC (“Navient”) shall file any responsive letter to Plaintiff’s January 12, 2021, letter at Docket No. 105. It is further ORDERED that, Plaintiff’s motion to seal is GRANTED nunc pro tunc. The letter at Docket No. 105 will remain sealed. Although “[t]he common law right of public access to judicial documents is firmly rooted in our nation’s history,” this right is not absolute, and courts “must balance competing considerations against” the presumption of access. Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119–20 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 599 (1978) (“[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case.”). Filing the above-referenced document under seal is necessary to prevent the unauthorized dissemination of confidential business information of Navient. It is further ORDERED that, by January 21, 2021, Plaintiffs shall serve a copy of this Order and the January 12, 2021, letter at Docket No. 105 on Navient. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motion at Docket No. 103. Dated: January 19, 2021 New York, New York

LORNA G. Sctneib UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

USONUITTEHDE RSTNA DTIESST RDIICSTT ROIFC TN ECWOU YROTR K --------------------------------------------------------------X : FRANCIS DIDONATO, : Plaintiff, : 20 Civ. 2154 (LGS) : -against- : ORDER : GC SERVICES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, et al., : Defendants. : ------------------------------------------------------------- X LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge: WHEREAS, on January 12, 2021, Plaintiff filed under seal, a letter requesting to modify the Protective Order in this action. Dkt. No. 105. WHEREAS, on January 12, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion to seal the January 12, 2021, letter at Docket No. 105. Dkt. Nos. 102, 103. It is hereby ORDERED that, by January 25, 2021, Defendants and non-party Navient Solutions, LLC (“Navient”) shall file any responsive letter to Plaintiff’s January 12, 2021, letter at Docket No. 105. It is further ORDERED that, Plaintiff’s motion to seal is GRANTED nunc pro tunc. The letter at Docket No. 105 will remain sealed. Although “[t]he common law right of public access to judicial documents is firmly rooted in our nation’s history,” this right is not absolute, and courts “must balance competing considerations against” the presumption of access. Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119–20 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 599 (1978) (“[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case.”). Filing the above-referenced document under seal is necessary to prevent the unauthorized dissemination of confidential business information of Navient. It is further ORDERED that, by January 21, 2021, Plaintiffs shall serve a copy of this Order and the January 12, 2021, letter at Docket No. 105 on Navient. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motion at Docket No. 103. Dated: January 19, 2021 New York, New York

LORNA G. Sctneib UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Didonato v. GS Services Limited Partnership, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/didonato-v-gs-services-limited-partnership-nysd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack