O'Gorman v. Mercer Kitchen L.L.C.

S.D. New York

O'Gorman v. Mercer Kitchen L.L.C.

DecidedJanuary 13, 2021

Docket1:20-cv-01404

StatusUnknown

This text of O'Gorman v. Mercer Kitchen L.L.C. (O'Gorman v. Mercer Kitchen L.L.C.) 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

O'Gorman v. Mercer Kitchen L.L.C., (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

Josh Bernstein, P.C. Civil Rights & Employment Law Josh Bernstein, P.C. (Phone) (646) 308-1515 175 Varick Street (Fax) (718) 679-9517 New York, NY 10014 jbernstein@jbernsteinpc.com December 30, 2020 RE: Letter Motion to File Motion to Amend Under Seal The Honorable Lewis J. Liman United States District Court, Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street, Room 701 New York, NY 10007 P. O’Gorman v. Mercer Kitchen L.L.C., et. al, No. 20-CV-01404 Judge Liman, I represent Plaintiff P. O’Gorman in the above-captioned matter, and write to request leave to file Plaintiff's Motion to Amend the Complaint under seal. The Motion to Amend seeks to implead additional parties on the basis of information gleaned from leases, operating agreements, and other documents produced by Defendants in this matter that have been marked confidential by Defendants. Accordingly, Plaintiff is prohibited from explaining the basis for the motion by the Protective Order in place in this matter absent the ability to file under seal. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Very truly yours,

/s/ Joshua Alexander Bernstein aintiff's application fails to satisfy the standards under Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cu Moreover, the fact that information is subject to a confidentiality agreement between litigants is not by □□□□□□ □ valid to overcome the presumption. See id. at 119; United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1050 (2d Cir. 1995). motion to seal is DENIED without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a copy of the motion to amend with proposed redactions to information that is truly confidential or sensitive and satisfies Lugosch. See United States v. Aref, 533 F.3d 72, 93 | 2008) (stating "the requirement that district courts avoid sealing judicial documents in their entirety unless necessary"). aintiff may make such motion, after consulting with Defendants, by January 20, 2021. Otherwise, Plaintiff is directed to re motion to amend, proposed amended complaint, and supporting memorandum publicly and without redaction by that dat aw ie: ae

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

Josh Bernstein, P.C. Civil Rights & Employment Law Josh Bernstein, P.C. (Phone) (646) 308-1515 175 Varick Street (Fax) (718) 679-9517 New York, NY 10014 jbernstein@jbernsteinpc.com December 30, 2020 RE: Letter Motion to File Motion to Amend Under Seal The Honorable Lewis J. Liman United States District Court, Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street, Room 701 New York, NY 10007 P. O’Gorman v. Mercer Kitchen L.L.C., et. al, No. 20-CV-01404 Judge Liman, I represent Plaintiff P. O’Gorman in the above-captioned matter, and write to request leave to file Plaintiff's Motion to Amend the Complaint under seal. The Motion to Amend seeks to implead additional parties on the basis of information gleaned from leases, operating agreements, and other documents produced by Defendants in this matter that have been marked confidential by Defendants. Accordingly, Plaintiff is prohibited from explaining the basis for the motion by the Protective Order in place in this matter absent the ability to file under seal. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Very truly yours,

/s/ Joshua Alexander Bernstein aintiff's application fails to satisfy the standards under Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cu Moreover, the fact that information is subject to a confidentiality agreement between litigants is not by □□□□□□ □ valid to overcome the presumption. See id. at 119; United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1050 (2d Cir. 1995). motion to seal is DENIED without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a copy of the motion to amend with proposed redactions to information that is truly confidential or sensitive and satisfies Lugosch. See United States v. Aref, 533 F.3d 72, 93 | 2008) (stating "the requirement that district courts avoid sealing judicial documents in their entirety unless necessary"). aintiff may make such motion, after consulting with Defendants, by January 20, 2021. Otherwise, Plaintiff is directed to re motion to amend, proposed amended complaint, and supporting memorandum publicly and without redaction by that dat aw ie: ae

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

O'Gorman v. Mercer Kitchen L.L.C., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ogorman-v-mercer-kitchen-llc-nysd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack