Atlantic Recording Corporation, Bad Boy Records LLC, Big Beat Records Inc., Elektra Entertainment Group Inc., Rhino Entertainment LLC, Warner Music International Services Limited, Warner Music Nashville LLC, Warner Records Inc., Cotillion Music, Inc., Gene Autry's Western Music Publishing Co., Unichappell Music Inc., W Chappell Music Corp., W.C.M. Music Corp., Warner Chappell Music, Inc., and Warner-Tamerlane Publishing Corp. v. Designer Brands Inc., DSW Shoe Warehouse, Inc., Topo Athletic LLC, and Does 1 through 10, inclusive

United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio · January 8, 2026 · No. 2:25-cv-00479-MHW-EPD

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio granted Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for leave to file under seal their forthcoming opposition to Defendants’ motion to compel. The Court directed that the opposition and related information remain under seal until further order and prohibited public or third-party disclosure of the sealed information absent agreement by the parties.

Court
United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Writing for the Court
Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Decision date
January 8, 2026
Docket number
2:25-cv-00479-MHW-EPD
Procedural posture
Plaintiffs moved, without opposition, for leave to file under seal their forthcoming opposition to defendants' motion to compel.
Precedential value
unpublished district court order
Disposition
other

Topics

civil procedurediscovery disputecommercial litigation

Practice areas

civil procedurediscoverysealing of court records

Questions Presented

  1. Whether plaintiffs should be permitted to file under seal an opposition to defendants' motion to compel that references information already subject to a sealing order.

Holdings

  1. The Court granted plaintiffs' unopposed motion for leave to file under seal because protecting the information at issue outweighed the public's interest in disclosure.

Factual background

The plaintiffs were preparing an opposition to defendants' motion to compel. The opposition would reference information contained in defendants' motion that the Court had previously ordered sealed. Plaintiffs therefore requested leave to file the opposition under seal, and defendants did not oppose the request.

Procedural history

Plaintiffs sought to seal information in their forthcoming opposition that was referenced in defendants' motion to compel and had already been ordered sealed by the Court. The district court granted the unopposed motion and directed that the opposition and sealed information remain under seal until further order.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…