Shukla v. Deloitte Consulting LLP

Docket 1:19-cv-10578

Filed
2019-11-14
Terminated
2021-08-20
Case type
cv

Outcome

other judgment · defendant

FJC civil IDB DISTRICT=08 OFFICE=1 DOCKET=1910578 FILEDATE=11/14/2019 DISP=17, PROCPROG=10, JUDGMENT=2; codebook: https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/idb/codebooks/Civil%20Codebook%201988%20Forward%2010252023.pdf

Outcome source

Parties and representation

      Party and firm records are not available for this case.

      Panel

        No sourced panel votes are recorded.

        Opinions and documents

        USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC #: DATE FILED: 8/19/2020 Ashu Shukla, Plaintiff, 1:19-cv-10578 (AJN) (SDA) -against- ORDER Deloitte Consulting LLP, Defendant. STEWART D. AARON, United States Magistrate Judge: Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Letter Motion (ECF No. 60) requesting the Court to seal his August 10, 2020 Letter entitled “Defendant’s abuse of their Power, Position and Remedies available at the United States Judicial.” (See ECF No. 59.) Plaintiff argues that the letter should be sealed because it contains confidential business information. (See id.) Filing under seal must be narrowly tailored and consistent with the presumption of public access to judicial documents. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006); see also Brown v. Maxwell, 18-cv-2868 1, 17 (2d Cir. July 3, 2019). Plaintiff's general assertion that the Letter contains confidential business information is insufficient. In any event, having reviewed the Letter, the Court finds that it merely reiterates allegations and information already available on the public docket. Because the Court does not find that the Plaintiff has provided an adequate basis to justify sealing, Plaintiff's motion to seal DENIED. SO ORDERED. DATED: New York, New York August 19, 2020 STEWART D. AARON United States Magistrate Judge

        Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.