Darton Archery LLC v. Bowtech, LLC

Docket 1:23-cv-00140

Filed
2023-02-06
Terminated
2023-08-16
Case type
cv

Outcome

voluntarily dismissed

FJC civil IDB DISTRICT=11 OFFICE=1 DOCKET=2300140 FILEDATE=02/06/2023 DISP=12, PROCPROG=1, JUDGMENT=0; 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

        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE DARTON ARCHERY, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Vv. ) C.A. 23-140-CFC ) BOWTECH, LLC f/k/a BOWTECH, INC., ) BOWTECH GP, LLC, EXCALIBUR ) CROSSBOW, LLC, EXCALIBUR ) CROSSBOW US, LLC, EXCALIBUR ) CROSSBOW HOLDINGS, LLC, and ) EXCALIBUR CROSSBOW INVESTORS, ) LLC, ) ) Defendnats. ) MEMORANDUM ORDER Pending before me is Defendants’ Unopposed Motion to Seal Exhibit 1 to Defendants’ Corporate Disclosure Statement (D.I. 17). Defendants want to maintain under seal the ownership and citizenship of JDH Capital I, LP, a Delaware limited partnership that is the sole member of Bowhunter Acquisition, LLC, which is the sole member of Defendant Bowtech, LLC, which is the sole member of Defendant Excalibur Crossbow, LLC and Defendant Excalibur Crossbow US, LLC. The District Court is not a star chamber. We are a public institution in a democratic republic and the public has a right of access to our filings and proceedings. That right is founded in the common law and “antedates the Constitution.” Bank of Am. Nat’l Tr. & Sav. Ass'n v. Hotel Rittenhouse Assocs., 800 F.2d 339, 343 (3d Cir. 1986). The public’s right of access is not absolute; but it is strongly presumed, and it can be overcome only if a party demonstrates that public disclosure of a filing will result in “a clearly defined and serious injury,” Jn re Avandia Mktg., Sales Pracs. & Prod. Liab. Litig., 924 F.3d 662,672 (3d Cir. 2019). Defendants state that “[d]etails pertaining to the specific ownership of JDH Capital I, LP, are not publicly available and disclosure of such confidential material risks substantial harm to JDH Capital I, LP’s business interests.” D.I. 17 at 1. Defendants do not say how JDH Capital I, LP’s business interests could suffer harm by the public disclosure of the identity and citizenship of its owners. In any event, the public disclosure that an individual has an ownership interest in an entity created by a state cannot be said to constitute a clearly defined and serious injury. Corporations and limited partnerships may offer individuals protection from liability, but they do not entitle individuals to anonymity in court proceedings. Now therefore, at Wilmington on this Third day of April in 2023, Defendants’ Unopposed Motion to Seal Exhibit 1 to Defendants’ Corporate Disclosure Statement (D.I. 17) is DENIED. Chief Judge 7

        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.