Troell v. Binance Holdings Limited

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided July 21, 2025·No. 1:24-cv-07136·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK wee KX JOCELYN TROELL, individually, and for the estate of : STEPHEN TROELL, et al., : Plaintiffs, : 24-CV-07136 (JAV) -v- : ORDER BINANCE HOLDINGS LIMITED d/b/a BINANCE and: BINANCE.com, and CHANGPENG ZHAO. : Defendants. :

JEANNETTE A. VARGAS, United States District Judge: Defendants’ request for permission to seal certain nonpublic and governmentally sensitive information referenced in and attached as Exhibits A and B to the Parties’ contemporaneously filed joint letter dated July 7, 2025 (ECF No. 120) GRANTED. Defendants have made a sufficient showing that the information that they seek to seal, concerning Government Production Letters, qualifies as documents to be sealed where “closure is essential to preserve higher values and 1s narrowly tailored to serve that interest.” Lugosch v. Pyramid Company of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 120 (2d Cir. 2006). The right of public access to judicial documents is not absolute and “the court must balance competing considerations against it.” Lugosch, 435 F.3d at 120. In light of the detailed and nonpublic information describing the scope of Defendants’ productions in connection with multiple government investigations, the Court concludes that sealing is appropriate in this instance. Plaintiffs are directed to file the sealed documents on the docket and file the unredacted versions under seal. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 119. SO ORDERED. - co of {gf ~ FAA ul tH { i + Dated: July 21, 2025 IIA Me ed New York, New York JEANNETTE A. VARGAS United States District Judge

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

Troell v. Binance Holdings Limited, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Troell v. Binance Holdings Limited (Troell v. Binance Holdings Limited) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga
435 F.3d 110 (Second Circuit, 2006)