Opinion

Maher v. Bank of Nova Scotia

Court
District Court, S.D. New York
Filed
Feb 1, 2021
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 27.2%

The opinion

SALE OL idly BB

| MIEMU ENDUROLD

FILED: 2/1/2021

SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP 125 Byoad Sveot

TELEPHONE: 1-212-556-4000 New York, New York 10004-2498

January 29, 2021

Via ECF

Hon. Valerie E. Caproni

United States District Court for the

Southern District of New York

Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse

40 Foley Square

New York, NY 10007

Re: In re Commodity Exchange, Inc., Gold Futures and Options

Trading Litigation, No. 14-md-2548 (VEC)

Dear Judge Caproni:

We write on behalf of The Bank of Nova Scotia, and on behalf of Barclays

Bank PLC, Société Générale, and The London Gold Market Fixing Limited

(“Defendants”), to respectfully request that the Court seal portions of Defendants’

January 29, 2021 Memorandum of Law in Support of Their Motion to Depose Rosa M.

Abrantes-Metz and Gustavo Bamberger (the “January 29 Memorandum’’) and exhibits B-

E enclosed thereto.

On January 18, 2017, the Court entered the Stipulation and Protective

Order (Dkt. No. 208) (the “Protective Order”), which states that “[a]ll Confidential or

Highly Confidential Discovery Material filed with the Court, and all portions of

pleadings, motions or other papers filed with the Court that disclose such Confidential or

Highly Confidential Discovery Material, shall be filed under seal with the Clerk of the

Court and kept under seal until further Order of the Court.” The documents described in

and attached to the January 29 Memorandum were designated “Confidential” by

Plaintiffs and filed under seal on November 18, 2020 (ECF No. 476).

Paragraph 16 of the Protective Order states that, for documents “subject to

a confidentiality designation” included in or attached to a court filing, the “party

submitting that filing shall serve counsel for the producing Person or other Person

designating the Discovery Material with a copy of the filing at the time the filing under

seal is made.” As set out in the Protective Order, Defendants are serving a copy of the

January 29 Memorandum and the enclosed exhibits on Plaintiffs, and to the extent

The Honorable Valerie E. Caproni -2-

Plaintiffs continue to designate these materials as “Confidential,” will submit a statement

to the Court within ten business days containing any statements from Plaintiffs on why

sealing the redacted material is appropriate.

For the foregoing reasons, we respectfully request that the redacted

portions of Defendants’ January 29 Memorandum and exhibits B-E be filed under seal.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Stephen Ehrenberg

Stephen Ehrenberg

cc: Counsel of Record (via ECF)

By no later than Friday, February 12, 2021, Plaintiffs must inform the Court whether they object to the filin

of unredacted versions of Defendants' memorandum of law and exhibits at docket entry 509 on the public

docket. If Plaintiffs object, they must explain why such redactions are warranted given the presumption of

access in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). Plaintiffs are welcome to prop:

more narrow redactions; though Plaintiffs must demonstrate that any proposed redactions overcome the Lugo,

presumption. The Court encourages the parties to consult the Court's endorsements at docket entries 480 and

494. If Defendants would like to reply to Plaintiffs’ letter, they must do so by no later than Friday, February

19, 2021.

SO ORDERED.

Date: February 1, 2021

HON. VALERIE CAPRONI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.