Santiago Rocael Perez Ramirez v. A Spice Route, Inc.

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: June 11, 2020
• Docket: 1:19-cv-07641
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

FTaexl:: 221122--446655--11118801 info@leelitigation.com WRITER’S DIRECT: 212-661-1008 anne@leelitigation.com June 11, 2020 Via ECF Motion to Seal GRANTED. Instructions for filing under seal The Honorable Lewis J. Liman, U.S.D.J. are available at the following website: https:// United States District Court nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/ecf_training/SDNY% Southern District of New York 20Sealed%20Filing%20in%20ECF.pdf 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 6/11/2020 Re: Perez Ramirez v. A Spice Route, Inc., et al. No. 19-CV-07641-LJL Dear Judge Liman: We are counsel to Plaintiff in the above-captioned action. We write to respectfully request that the letter attached as Exhibit A be filed under seal. During the discovery telehearing on June 4, 2020, the Court had discussed, due to the sensitive nature of the information relating to Plaintiff’s ability to obtain a “tax transcript” from the IRS, entertaining a request to seal. In addition, on June 10, 2020 the parties entered into a stipulated Protective Order, which was filed with the Court at Dkt. 56, however it has not yet been So Ordered. Courts have broad discretion to permit sealing of filed documents. Here, there is good cause to seal the attached letter. “…[C]ourts are typically reluctant to compel [income tax record] disclosure because of both ‘the private nature of the sensitive information contained therein’ and ‘the public interest in encouraging the filing by taxpayers of complete and accurate returns.’” Uto v. Job Site Servs Inc., 269 F.R.D. 209, 212 (E.D.N.Y. 2010) (quoting Smith v. Bader, 83 F.R.D. 437, 438 (S.D.N.Y. 1979)). Although in the subject action, the Court is permitting Defendant to probe the issue of tax reporting, in an attempt to ascertain whether Plaintiff was employed by anyone other than Defendants during the time in which he was employed by Defendants, information regarding the ability of Plaintiff to obtain documentation from the IRS is highly sensitive, private and should be kept confidential as such information includes references to Plaintiff’s immigration status, Social Security Number and/or ITIN number. Here the interests of keeping such information private outweigh the public’s right of access to same. As similarly discussed in Kim v. Kum Gang, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77041 at *5 (S.D.N.Y. June 2, 2014), this type of disclosure poses a “real danger of undercutting the protective goals of the remedial statutes under which plaintiffs have sued. They work in an industry that often employs undocumented foreigners. Exposing those individuals to the potential threat of removal or criminal prosecution surely would tend to deter the filing of legitimate lawsuits.” Id. at 6. In view of the foregoing, Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court seal the attached letter. Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Anne Seelig Anne Seelig, Esq.

cc: Defendants via ECF