Koh v. Koo

Opinion

LAW OFFICES COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP LOS ANGELES SAN FRANCISCO AIRPORT OFFICE CENTER SEATTLE 840 MALCOLM ROAD NEW YORK BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 TELEPHONE (650) 697-6000 eviews en Application GRANTED. The Clerk Court is directed to modify ECF No. August 18, 2022 1-4 and 4-3 to be viewable by the parties and Court only and to termin VIA ECF ECF No. 13. SOQ ORDERED. Honorable Jesse M. Furman United States District Court Southern District of New York 40 Centre Street, Room 2202 August 19, 20 New York, NY 10007 Re: | Unopposed Motion to Seal Portions of Exhibit 2 to Koh Affidavit Koh v. Koo, Case No. 1:22-cv-06639. Dear Judge Furman: Defendant Brian Koo submits this unopposed motion to seal portions of Exhibit 2 to Plaintiff Koh’s affidavit in support of his requested TRO (“Exhibit 2”). Because Plaintiffs were required to re-file this document, Exhibit 2 appears twice on the docket at Dkt Nos. 1-4 and 4-3. A proposed redacted version is submitted concurrently herewith. Plaintiffs do not oppose this request. 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. v. Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006). Here, filing Exhibit 2 in redacted form is necessary to prevent the unauthorized dissemination of confidential business and highly sensitive personal information including commercial information about third parties and highly sensitive personal and financial information. See, e.g., Ghouneim v, 352-354 H.D.F.C., 2019 WL 1523326, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (sealing ECF submissions “to protect sensitive personal and financial information”); Abraham vy. Leigh, 2020 WL 5095655, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) (maintaining documents “under seal because they disclosed ‘irrelevant, salacious, or personally sensitive material’”). Mr. Koo’s declaration in opposition to the TRO attests to the sensitive nature of this information. Dkt. No. 8-1 at □□ 44. Accordingly, Defendants request that the Court seal the requested portions of Exhibit 2. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Brian Danitz BRIAN DANITZ Encl. cc: All counsel of record