Golden Unicorn Enterprises, Inc. v. Audible, Inc.

North Carolina South Carolina Law OFrrices Or 555 Souk Mangum Sur pura □□□ Raloigh Swerve "GOO 220-7321 (P) Sa, Epa” JAMES SCOTT FARRIN | oe ea Goldsboro Sanford Tax ID: 56-2046742 ee Wee www. farrin.com Henderson Winston-Salem Match 30, 2023 By CM/ECEF ‘The Honorable Jesse M. Furman United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York Thurgood Marshall Courthouse Centre Street, Room 2202 New York, NY 10007 Re: Golden Unicorn Enters., Inc. v. Audible, Inc., 1:21-cv-7059-JMF Dear Judge Furman: Plaintiffs write pursuant to Section 7(C) of Your Honor’s Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases and Your Honor’s Order, ECF No. 234, seeking leave for Defendant Audible to file a redacted version of one exhibit to Defendant Audible Inc.’s Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of its Renewed Motion for Spoliation Sanctions, ECF No. 236.

Both federal common law and the First Amendment establish a presumption of public access to judicial documents. See In re New York City Policing During Summer 2020 Demonstrations, 20-CV-8924- CM-GWG, 2022 WL 7886182, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 14, 2022) (citing Lagosch v. Pyramid Co., 435 F.3d 110, 120 (2d Cir. 2006)). A court weighing a motion to seal or redact documents must first determine the extent to which each one is a “judicial document,” that is, whether it is “relevant to the performance of the judicial function and useful in the judicial process.” Id. (quoting United States v. Amodeo, 44 F.3d 141, 145 (2d Cir. 1995)). The court must then weigh the presumption of access against countervailing interests such as privacy interests. See zd. at *2.

Plaintiffs do not seek to maintain any documents entirely under seal. Rather, Plaintiffs ask the Court to (1) allow Audible to file one exhibit to the motion with narrow redactions and (2) to maintain the seal over the unredacted version of that exhibit, which Audible filed on March 23, 2023.

Specifically, Plaintiffs have partially redacted the street addresses and home telephone numbers of Plaintiffs and their employees and vendors in ECF No. 236-2, excerpts from Plaintiffs’ initial disclosures. Plaintiffs have redacted the street names and numbers of Jan Bonthu, president and owner of Plaintiff Golden Unicorn Enterprises (“GUE”); her husband, Srikanth Bonthu, vice president of GUE; former GUE marketing contractor Annette Stone; Ms. Bonthu’s sister Sandra Retzlaff; Ehzabeth Noble, manager and sole member of Plaintiff Big Dog Books; and her husband, Shawn Noble, while leaving their cities of residence unredacted. Plaintiffs have left the three-digit area codes unredacted but redacted the last seven digits of these individuals’ home and cellular telephone numbers, as this information is not “relevant to the performance of the judicial function and useful in the judicial process.” In re New York City Policing, 2022 WL. 7886182, at *1. Audible’s motion is unlikely to turn on the precise addresses or telephone numbers, and, to the extent the Court does consider this information, Plaintiffs’ redactions allow the public to know the cities of residence without public disclosure of information that creates a risk of intrusion by strangers into their homes (2¢., precise home addresses and home and cellular telephone numbers). See zd. at *2.

Respectfully, a Mitchell M. Breit Dak : Leland Belew EE ED Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips & Grossman Chris Bagley)” One Pennsylvania Plaza, Floor 50 Gary Jackson New York, NY 10119 Law Offices of James Scott Farrin (347) 668-8445 S. Mangum Street, Suite 800 [email protected] Durham, NC 27701 (919) 287-5037 P. Renée Wicklund [email protected] Richman Law & Policy Mission Street San Francisco, CA 94105 (415) 259-5688 [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiffs Golden Unicorn Enterprises, Inc., and Big Dog Books, LLC The motion to seal is granted temporarily. The Court will assess whether to keep the materials at issue sealed or redacted when deciding the underlying motion. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 238.

SO ORDERED.

31, 2023