• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


DC Court Refuses to Seal Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award

0
by Beth Graham

Thursday, Nov 09, 2017


Tweet

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia has denied a party’s motion to seal its petition to confirm an arbitration award and two attached exhibits.  In XPO Intermodal, Inc. v. American President Lines, Ltd., No. 17-2015 (PLF) (D. D.C., October 16, 2017), XPO Intermodal argued the documents should be sealed in order to protect confidential terms and highly sensitive business information.  The district court was not persuaded, however, and stated “applicant’s motion proffers little to justify sealing what, in effect, amounts to the entire substantive record in this case.”

The district court reminded the parties there is a “strong presumption in favor of public access to judicial proceedings,” before turning to the six factors that must be considered in order to overcome that presumption:

(1) the need for public access to the documents at issue; (2) the extent of previous public access to the documents; (3) the fact that someone has objected to disclosure, and the identity of that person; (4) the strength of any property and privacy interests asserted; (5) the possibility of prejudice in those opposing disclosure; and (6) the purposes for which the documents were introduced during the judicial proceedings.

Next, the district court ruled the documents at issue in the case did not merit sealing XPO Intermodal’s entire petition:

Here, it appears that the exhibits to applicant’s Petition do include some potentially sensitive business information, including rates and schedules, but the filings otherwise do not warrant sealing from the public. The Court thus sees no reason why the Petition itself should not be made publicly available in full, nor any reason why the exhibits thereto should not be made generally available, with only the most sensitive information redacted. The Court is confident that a more rigorous examination undertaken in good faith will lead to a more tailored and appropriate proposal for redaction.

Ultimately, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia resolved the case by ordering the parties to propose specific redactions to the court in lieu of sealing the entire petition.

H/T to Mark Kantor.

Photo credit:  FreeImages.com / Oliver Gruener

Related Posts

  • Fifth Circuit Reverses Arbitrator’s Ruling in Southwest Airlines Labor DisputeFifth Circuit Reverses Arbitrator’s Ruling in Southwest Airlines Labor Dispute
  • Fifth Circuit Affirms Vacatur After Arbitrator Exceeded His AuthorityFifth Circuit Affirms Vacatur After Arbitrator Exceeded His Authority
  • Fifth Circuit Rules Louisiana Non-Resident Attachment Statute May be Used Prior to Anticipated ArbitrationFifth Circuit Rules Louisiana Non-Resident Attachment Statute May be Used Prior to Anticipated Arbitration
  • Fourth Circuit Upholds $900K FINRA Arbitration Award After Bank Fails to Weigh in on Arbitral PanelFourth Circuit Upholds $900K FINRA Arbitration Award After Bank Fails to Weigh in on Arbitral Panel
  • Fifth Circuit Affirms $1.45 Million Arbitration Award in Legal Fees DisputeFifth Circuit Affirms $1.45 Million Arbitration Award in Legal Fees Dispute
  • Fifth Circuit Holds Diversity Jurisdiction Exists After FINRA Issues $10K Arbitration AwardFifth Circuit Holds Diversity Jurisdiction Exists After FINRA Issues $10K Arbitration Award

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Beth Graham

Beth Graham earned a Master of Arts in Information Science and Learning Technologies from the University of Missouri-Columbia, and a Juris Doctor from the University of Nebraska College of Law, where she was an Eastman Memorial Law Scholar. Beth is licensed to practice law in Texas and the District of Columbia. She is also a member of the Texas Bar College and holds CIPP/US, CIPP/E, and CIPM certifications from the International Association of Privacy Professionals.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy