Cohn v. Popescu
1:24-cv-00337
E.D. Tex.May 23, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Bruce Cohn filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas against several defendants, including Anna Popescu, TrustHFTWallet.com, Zedxion Exchange Ltd, Elizabeth Newman, and unidentified John Does, alleging financial misconduct.
- Cohn sought to file his Second Amended Complaint and Second Motion for Ex Parte Temporary Restraining Order under seal, citing the presence of sensitive financial data—account holder names and blockchain addresses—provided by a third party under a Protective Order.
- The defendants have been alleged as scammers and had not made an appearance in the case at the time of the motion.
- The Court acknowledged the general presumption that judicial records are public but recognized exceptions for sensitive information.
- The Court reviewed the materials in question to determine whether sealing them is justified, balancing privacy interests against the public’s right of access.
- The motion was granted to file the documents under seal, but plaintiff was ordered to file redacted public versions within seven days.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether to seal the Second Amended Complaint and TRO motion | Sensitive financial data warrants confidentiality | Not stated (no appearance) | Sealing justified; must file redacted public versions |
| Standard for sealing judicial records | Documents include private financial info from a third party under a protective order | Not stated (no appearance) | Stringent balancing; presumption against sealing, but justified here |
| Necessity of public access to judicial records | Privacy interests of parties outweigh public disclosure | Not stated (no appearance) | Public gets access via redacted versions |
| Applicability of Rule 26(c) protective orders to filings | Info under discovery protective order should stay confidential | Not stated (no appearance) | Protective order alone insufficient; must justify sealing on the merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Binh Hoa Le v. Exeter Fin. Corp., 990 F.3d 410 (5th Cir. 2021) (establishes presumption of public access to judicial records and sets forth the sealing standard)
- BP Expl. & Prod., Inc. v. Claimant ID 100246928, 920 F.3d 209 (5th Cir. 2019) (emphasizes public transparency and its importance to judicial legitimacy)
- June Med. Servs., L.L.C. v. Phillips, 22 F.4th 512 (5th Cir. 2022) (clarifies that meeting discovery protective order standards does not mean filings should be sealed)