Exel Inc. v. Xpedient Anagement Group, LLC, 2:17-cv-1076. (2018)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20180307743
Visitors: 3
Filed: Jan. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 19, 2018
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR. , Chief District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Seal Hearing Transcripts and Plaintiff's TRO Hearing Exhibit 16. (ECF No. 27.) The Court has reviewed the requested redactions (ECF No. 27-1) and is inclined to GRANT Plaintiff's request. As the Court indicated at the TRO Hearing, it draws no legal conclusions related to the exhibit and testimony by its sealing. Accordingly, the Court Reporter is DIRECTED to redact
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR. , Chief District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Seal Hearing Transcripts and Plaintiff's TRO Hearing Exhibit 16. (ECF No. 27.) The Court has reviewed the requested redactions (ECF No. 27-1) and is inclined to GRANT Plaintiff's request. As the Court indicated at the TRO Hearing, it draws no legal conclusions related to the exhibit and testimony by its sealing. Accordingly, the Court Reporter is DIRECTED to redact t..
More
OPINION AND ORDER
EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR., Chief District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Seal Hearing Transcripts and Plaintiff's TRO Hearing Exhibit 16. (ECF No. 27.) The Court has reviewed the requested redactions (ECF No. 27-1) and is inclined to GRANT Plaintiff's request. As the Court indicated at the TRO Hearing, it draws no legal conclusions related to the exhibit and testimony by its sealing. Accordingly, the Court Reporter is DIRECTED to redact the portions of the transcript the Court has approved, which can be found at docket number 27-1.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
