Gravitas Search Partners LLC v. Deutsch

Opinion

USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC #: GRAVITAS SEARCH PARTNERS LLC, DATE FILED:__ 4/24/2024 Plaintiff, -against- 24-CV-02683 (MMG) JENNIFER A. DEUTSCH, et al., ORDER Defendants.

MARGARET M. GARNETT, United States District Judge: WHEREAS, by letter-motion on April 16, 2024, Defendant Jennifer A. Deutsch (“Defendant”) requested to leave to file a redacted version of her Memorandum of Law in support of her Motion to Dismiss, a redacted version of the Declaration of Emily Reisbaum in support of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, and Exhibits 2 and 4 through 8 entirely under seal, see Dkt. No. 11; and WHEREAS, by letter on April 19, 2024, Plaintiff Gravitas Search Partners LLC (“Plaintiff”) responded to Defendant’s letter-motion, see Dkt. No. 18; and WHEREAS Exhibit 2 concerns highly sensitive and confidential information regarding certain non-parties, specifically regarding their respective candidacies and interest in a non-party client of Plaintiff; WHEREAS the proposed redactions to Defendant’s Memorandum of Law in support of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss similarly discusses the nature of Exhibit 2, including discussing the highly sensitive and confidential information described above; and WHEREAS Exhibits 4 through 8 are screenshots of publicly available webpages; The Court having examined the documents in questions and considered the parties’ representations, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant’s letter-motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. “The common law right of public access to judicial documents is firmly rooted in our nation’s history,” however, 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 Commce’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.”’). Defendant may file her proposed redacted version of her Memorandum of Law in support of her Motion to Dismiss, and may file Exhibit 2 under seal in its entirety. Defendant shall

publicly file unredacted and unsealed versions of the Declaration of Emily Reisbaum in support of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, as well as Exhibits 4 through 8. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate Dkt. No. 11. Dated: April 24, 2024 New York, New York SO ORDERED.

wana 1 San United States District Judge