Automated Summary
Key Facts
This is a diversity action where NGI Capital, Inc. (d/b/a Apex IT), an IT vendor, sued Watlow Electric Manufacturing Company for non-payment of services. The claims include breach of contract, quantum meruit, unjust enrichment, and account stated for work related to implementing Oracle Corporation's customer experience software product. The plaintiff sought to seal names of employees and 19 exhibits from the First Amended Complaint, but the District Judge denied the motion, ruling that the presumption of public access applies and countervailing considerations were not sufficiently strong.
Transaction Type
IT vendor contract for customer experience software implementation services
Issues
Whether to grant plaintiff's motion to seal names of employees and various exhibits from the First Amended Complaint and related documents, including the Master Services Agreement and Statement of Work. The court considered the presumption of public access to judicial documents versus the plaintiff's claims of confidentiality and competitive concerns.
Holdings
The court denied Plaintiff's motion to seal names of employees and 19 exhibits attached to the First Amended Complaint, ordering unredacted versions filed on the public docket within 5 days, with limited exceptions for email addresses, phone numbers, and materials redactable under Rule 5.2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Remedies
The motion to seal (ECF 16) was denied and unredacted versions must be filed on the public docket within 5 days, except that any email addresses and phone numbers in the exhibits to the FAC may be redacted, along with any material permitted to be redacted under Rule 5.2, Fed. R. Civ. P.
Legal Principles
The court applied the presumption of public access to judicial documents, citing Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga. The complaint as a foundational pleading ought to set forth claims and a concise statement of facts showing entitlement to relief. The presumption is strong because the complaint explains the nature of the action to an interested member of the public, and countervailing considerations were not shown to be strong or narrowly tailored to serve higher values.
Precedent Name
Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga
Judge Name
P. Kevin Castel
Passage Text
- The motion to seal (ECF 16) is DENIED and unredacted versions shall be filed on the public docket within 5 days, except that any email addresses and phone numbers in the exhibits to the FAC may be redacted, along with any material permitted to be redacted under Rule 5.2, Fed. R. Civ. P.
- Countervailing considerations in this instance have not been shown to be strong. Nothing has been shown to be essential to higher values and narrowly tailored to serve those values.
- The presumption of public access attaches to the FAC. It is the foundational pleading for the action that ought to set forth the claims and a short and concise statement of facts showing that plaintiff is entitled to relief.