Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Qin

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP West 52nd Street | New York, NY 10019-6131 | tel 212.858.1000 | fax 212.858.1500 Andrew C. Smith tel: 212.858.1743 [email protected] October 23, 2023 VIA ECF The Honorable Katherine Polk Failla United States District Court MEMO ENDORSED Southern District of New York Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse Foley Square, Room 2103 New York, NY 10007 Re: Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership, et al. v. Hui Qin,Case No. 21 Civ. 9221 (KPF) — Petitioners’ Request for Leave to File Document Under Seal Dear Judge Failla: We write on behalf of Petitioners Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership, Huzhou Huihengying Equity Investment Partnership, and Huzhou Huirongsheng Equity Investment Partnership (“Petitioners”) to request leave to file a document under seal, pursuant to the parties’ Stipulated Protective Order dated January 3, 2023, Dkt. No. 92.

In conjunction with Petitioners’ Opposition to Third-Party Emma Duo Liu’s (“Liu”) Motion for Reargument and Reconsideration, filed contemporaneously herewith, Petitioners respectfully request to file under seal Exhibit 4 to the Declaration of Andrew C. Smith pursuant to Rule 9(C) of Your Honor’s Individual Rules of Practice in Civil Cases.!

Pursuant to Rule 9 of Your Honor’s Individual Rules of Practice in Civil Cases, a party seeking to file a document under seal must address the presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents. The Second Circuit set forth the relevant standard Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). Under Lugosch, “[t]here is a common law presumption in favor of permitting public access to judicial documents, which are those documents ‘relevant to the performance of the judicial function and useful in the judicial process.’” GoSMILE, Inc. v. Dr. Jonathan Levine, D.M.D. P.C., 769 F. Supp. 2d 630, 649 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) (quoting Lugosch, 435 F.3d at 119). A court balances this common law presumption of access against competing comparisons, including “the privacy interests of those resisting disclosure.” Lugosch, 435 F.3d at 120 (quoting United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1050 (2d Cir. 1995)). Thus, the issue is ' Petitioners seek to file Exhibit 4 under seal to be accessed by Your Honor, Respondent Hui Qin, and Liu. www.pillsourylaw.com The Honorable Katherine Polk Failla October 23, 2023 Page 2 of 2 whether “the privacy interests of the defendants outweigh the presumption of public access.”

GoSMiLE, 769 F. Supp. 2d at 649-50.

Here, Exhibit 4, the transcript of Liu’s October 3, 2023 deposition, references documents or information that have been sealed or designated confidential pursuant to the parties’ Stipulated Protective Order. The parties’ interest in protecting confidential information, specifically sensitive personal or financial information, overcomes the presumption of access. Indeed, Your Honor has previously granted Petitioners’ request to file under seal certain exhibits to protect certain sensitive personal and/or financial information as well as information designated confidential, which was clearly visible. See Dkts. 112, 242, 264.

Because this document contains confidential information of the kind that is deserving of protection and restricting public access, Petitioners respectfully request that the Court grant their request to file Exhibit 4 under seal.

Respectfully submitted, /s/ Andrew C. Smith Andrew C. Smith ce: All counsel of record (via ECF) Application GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to maintain docket entry 315 under seal.

The Clerk of Court is further directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 310.

Dated: October 24, 2023 SO ORDERED.

New York, New York Kithorn Palle beth HON. KATHERINE POLK FAILLA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE