Opinion

Nypl v. JP Morgan Chase & Co.

Court
District Court, S.D. New York
Filed
Mar 21, 2022
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 27.4%

The opinion

Application GRANTED for substantially the reasons stated in this

letter.

June 22, 2021

The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to maintain the entries a

VIA ECF documents at Dkt. Nos. 718, 720, 723, 725, 726, 727, 733, 735, 738

740, 743, 748, 751 and 753 under seal with access limited to the

The Honorable Lorna G. Schofield individuals listed in Appendix A to this letter and to close the motic

United States District Judge at Dkt. No. 715.

Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse

40 Foley Square Dated: March 21, 2022 (

New York, New York 10007 New York, New York crates Duran JUDGE

Re: = Nypl, et al. v. JPMorgan Chase & Co, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-9300

Dear Judge Schofield:

Pursuant to Rule I.D.3 of Your Honor’s Individual Rules and Procedures for Civil Cases, the

parties respectfully seek leave to file under seal limited portions of the papers in support of and in

opposition to plaintiffs’ motion for class certification and the parties’ Daubert motions (the

“Parties’ Submissions”) as set forth below.

Certain portions of the Parties’ Submissions quote directly from or otherwise refer to documents

that have been designated as “Highly Confidential” under the Stipulation and Order of

Confidentiality (hereinafter the “Protective Order”) because they contain “material regarding

trading and investment strategies, pricing and cost information, customer lists, business strategy,

trade secrets and other commercial or financial information, the disclosure of which to another

Party or non-party would create a substantial risk of causing the Disclosing Party to suffer

significant competitive or commercial disadvantage ... .” (ECF No. 249 at 2-3.) In particular,

these documents disclose confidential, proprietary information concerning how each bank sets

retail foreign exchange rates for the purchase of physical foreign currency at its retail branches in

the United States. Because the process used to set these rates reflects confidential pricing

information and sensitive business strategies, the parties respectfully request that it not be

disclosed publicly. (See ECF No. 597, July 20, 2020 Order (granting plaintiffs’ motion to seal

portions of a joint letter containing similar information for this reason).) The proposed redactions

in the Parties’ Submissions are narrowly tailored to ensure that the bulk of the Parties’ Submissions

will be publicly available on the docket.

The parties also respectfully request that the Court protect from public disclosure certain

deposition testimony that is not material to class certification but has been designated Highly

Confidential under the Protective Order. By allowing the parties to file these transcripts under

seal, the Court would be protecting from disclosure testimony that is not material to class

certification but contains information that was designated Highly Confidential, while allowing

public access to that testimony that is material to class certification through the parties’ legal briefs.

As the Court knows, the Second Circuit has recognized that the right of public access to judicial

documents is not absolute and “the court must balance competing considerations against it.” See

Lugosch vy. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006). For instance,

documents may be sealed where “closure is essential to preserve higher values and is narrowly

red to serve that interest.” see also Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns., Inc.

(1978) (“[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a

circumstances of the particular case.”).

720, 2013 WL 211096, at *4 (N.D. Okla. Jan. 18, 2013) (“Courts

agreement.”).

Pursuant to Rule I.D.3 of Your Honor’s Individual Rules and Procedures of

Parties’ Submissions

. Further pursuant to Rule I.D.3 of Your Honor’s Individual Rules and

SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP

By: s/ Adam S. Hakki* By: s/ Matthew A. Schwartz*

Adam S. Hakki Matthew A. Schwartz

Jeffrey J. Resetarits Maeghan O. Mikorski

Attorneys for Defendants Bank of Attorneys for Defendants

America Corporation and Bank of Barclays PLC and Barclays Capital

America, N.A. Ine.

COVINGTON & BURLING LLP LOCKE LORD LLP

By: s/ Andrew A. Ruffino* By: s/ J. Matthew Goodin*

Andrew A. Ruffino Roger B. Cowie

Andrew D. Lazerow Gregory T. Casamento

J. Matthew Goodin

Julia C. Webb

Attorneys for Defendants Citicorp, Attorneys for Defendants HSBC Bank

Citigroup Inc. and Citibank N.A. USA, N.A. and HSBC North America

Holdings, Inc.

SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL LLP

MEAGHER & FLOM LLP

By: s/ Boris Bershteyn By: s/ Paul S. Mishkin*

Boris Bershteyn Paul S. Mishkin

Peter S. Julian Adam G. Mehes

Tansy Woan Alexander Bystryn

Attorneys for Defendants JPMorgan Attorneys for Defendant The Royal

Chase & Co. and JPMorgan Chase Bank of Scotland plc, now known as

Bank, N.A NatWest Markets Ple

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

By: s/Eric J. Stock*

Eric J. Stock

Melanie L. Katsur

Attorneys for Defendant UBS AG

*Signatures used with permission pursuant to S.D.N.Y. ECF Rule 8.5

APPENDIX A

Alioto Law Firm Law Offices of Lingel H. Winters

Joseph M. Alioto Lingel H. Winters

Thomas P. Pier

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Nedeau Law Firm Law Offices of Lawrence G. Papale

Christopher A Nedeau Lawrence Papale

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Attorneys for Plaintiffs

SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP

Adam S. Hakki Matthew A. Schwartz

Jeffrey J. Resetarits Maeghan O. Mikorski

George B. Adams

Attorneys for Defendants Bank of America Attorneys for Defendants Barclays PLC and

Corporation and Bank of America, N.A. Barclays Capital Inc.

COVINGTON & BURLING LLP LOCKE LORD LLP

Andrew A. Ruffino Roger B. Cowie

Andrew D. Lazerow Gregory T. Casamento

J. Matthew Goodin

Julia C. Webb

Attorneys for Defendants Citicorp, Citigroup | Attorneys for Defendants HSBC Bank USA,

Inc. and Citibank N.A. N.A. and HSBC North America Holdings, Inc.

SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL LLP

MEAGHER & FLOM LLP

Paul S. Mishkin

Boris Bershteyn Adam G. Mehes

Peter S. Julian Alexander Bystryn

Tansy Woan

Attorneys for Defendants JPMorgan Chase & | Attorneys for Defendant The Royal Bank of

Co. and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A Scotland plc, now known as NatWest Markets

Ple

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

Eric J. Stock

Melanie L. Katsur

Attorneys for Defendant UBS AG

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.