Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP T +1 310.229.1000 □□ 1999 Avenue of the Stars F +4 310.229.1001 Akin Suite 600 . Los Angoles, CA 90067 akingump.com Application granted. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested tc terminate ECF 337 and to seal ECF 338 with access restricted to case participants and court personnel. 50 ORDERED Marshall L. Baker +1 310.229.1074/fax: +1 310.229.1001 Date: August 25, 2025 luwaoww— mbaker@akingunip com New York. NY ROBYN F. TARNOFSKY , UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

August 22, 2025 VIA ECF The Honorable Robyn F. Tarnofsky United States Magistrate Judge Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, New York 10007-1312 Re: = Yipit LLC d/b/a YipitData v. Emmett et al; 1:24-cv-07854 (JGK)(RFT) — Motion to Seal Documents Dear Judge Tarnofsky: We represent plaintiff Yipit, LLC d/b/a YipitData (“Yipit’’) in the above-captioned matter. Yipit respectfully submits this letter motion to seal Yipit’s concurrently filed Reply Letter, including Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I (the “Exhibits”’) attached thereto, to M Science LLC’s Opposition Letter (Dkt. 331). The reason for Yipit’s request to file Exhibit A under seal is that it reveals the identities of Yipit’s customers, information that is highly confidential and considered by Yipit to be a trade secret. Sealing is justified under the standard set forth in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga,

(2d Cir. 2006). Yipit has a compelling interest in protecting its commercially sensitive and confidential business information, see Standard Inv. Chartered v. Fin. Indus. Regulatory Auth., Ind.,

, 617 (2d Cir. 2009), and courts routinely grant motions to seal documents disclosing specific, confidential information about a business’s customers, products, and pricing, see e.g., Hypnotic Hats, Ltd. V. Wintermantel Enter., LLC,

(S.D.N.Y. 2018); Kewazinga Corp. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 18-CV-4500 (GHW),

, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2021). Indeed, this Court had granted nearly identical requests to seal documents containing much of the same information underlying this motion. See Dkt. Nos. 65, 73, 96, 153, 171, 192, 201, 220. Exhibit B is a transcript of a deposition which, per the Protective Order (Dkt. 44), has been designated as “Highly Confidential.” Finally, Exhibits C, D, E, F, G, H, and I were produced by M Science in discovery and contain information identifying M Science and Yipit clients. Due to the hour of filing, we were unable to confer with M Science regarding these documents, but are

Akin

The Honorable Robyn F. Tarnofsky August 22, 2025 Page 2 requesting to seal them, per the protective order, as they were produced with a “Highly Confidential” designation. Accordingly, the motion to seal should be granted.

Sincerely, /s/ Marshall L. Baker Marshall L. Baker

cc: Counsel of Record (Via ECF)