Opinions and documents
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #:
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: 8/18/2023 _
Karen M. Suber,
Plaintiff,
20-cv-8177 (AJN)
—V—
ORDER
VVP Services, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.
ALISON J. NATHAN, Circuit Judge, sitting by designation:
The Court assumes familiarity with both the factual and procedural background
underlying this present sealing dispute. See Suber v. VVP Servs., LLC, No. 20-cv-8177 (AJN),
2021 WL 4429237, at *1-3 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 2021) (Dkt. No. 143); Suber v. VVP Servs., LLC,
No. 20-CV-8177 (AJN), 2023 WL 4817551, at *1-3 (S.D.N.Y. July 27, 2023) (Dkt. No. 172).
On July 27, 2023, the Court directed the parties to file responses to address the remaining
live issues concerning the sealing disputes over Exhibits 24 and 26. Dkt. No. 172. On August
3, 2023, Defendants filed a letter proposing redactions to the exhibits and justifying such
proposed redactions. Dkt. No. 175. On August 10, 2023, Plaintiff Karen Suber filed a letter
opposing Defendants’ proposed redactions to Exhibit 24. Dkt. No. 178.
In support of her letter, Plaintiff filed a sealed declaration on an ex parte basis. Dkt. No.
177. Plaintiff's letter also cites to another sealed declaration that she filed on an ex parte basis in
2021. Dkt. No. 60. “Ex parte submissions are highly disfavored.” Magee v. Walt Disney Co.,
No. 19-CV-10274 (AJN), 2020 WL 6047428, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 13, 2020); Schiller v. City of
New York, No. 04CIV.7921RJSJCF, 2008 WL 1777848, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 14, 2008) (“[T]he
overwhelming weight of authority favors the view that a court’s reliance on ex parte, in camera
submissions is strongly disfavored.”). Plaintiff has “failed to present any persuasive legal
authority or compelling justification” to show that ex parte submissions are warranted here.
Schiller, 2008 WL 1777848, at *3; see also United States v. Abuhamra, 389 F.3d 309, 328 (2d
Cir. 2004). Nor has Plaintiff demonstrated that any “countervailing factors” override the strong
presumption of public access to judicial documents as to justify sealing here. See Lugosch v.
Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 120 (2d Cir. 2006).
It is therefore ORDERED that no document previously submitted by Plaintiff to the
Court ex parte will be considered by the Court unless properly filed on the public docket no later
than August 25, 2023.
It is further ORDERED that Defendants must submit any reply no later than September
1st, 2023. In their reply, Defendants shall address Plaintiff's privilege waiver argument and
objections to Defendants’ proposed redactions to Exhibit 24.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 18, 2023 AM \) ig
New York, New York
ALISON J. NATHAN
United States Circuit Judge,
sitting by designation
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.