Loancare LLC v. Dimont & Associates, LLC

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: March 11, 2024
• Docket: 1:22-cv-09286
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

USDC SDNY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT UMENT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: LOANCARE LLC, DATE FILED:_ 03/11/2024 Plaintiff, -against- 22-CV-09286 (MMG) DIMONT & ASSOCIATES, LLC et al., ORDER Defendants.

MARGARET M. GARNETT, United States District Judge: WHEREAS, by letter-motion on March 4, 2024, Plaintiff, with Defendants’ consent, requested to file under seal Exhibits 6, 7, and 17 to Plaintiffs Rule 56.1 Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, see Dkt. No. 82; and WHEREAS, by an amended letter-motion on March 7, 2024, Plaintiff, with Defendants’ consent, requested to file under seal Exhibits 5, 6, 7, and 17 to Plaintiff’s Rule 56.1 Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, see Dkt. No. 86; and WHEREAS, the proposed documents to be filed under seal contain confidential business information, specifically documents concerning Plaintiffs internal policy and procedures and a sensitive contract with a third party; The Court having examined the documents in questions and considered the parties’ representations, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs letter-motion to file Exhibits 5, 6, 7, and 17 to its Rule 56.1 Statement of Undisputed Material Facts at Dkt. No. 84 is GRANTED. 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 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.”). Plaintiffs request to seal is necessary to protect its confidential business information. The Clerk of Court is directed to TERMINATE Dkt. Nos. 82 and 86. Dated: March 11, 2024 New York, New York SO ORDERED.

MARGAR 5 □ SSARNETT United States District Judge