Vinci Brands Llc V Coach Services Inc
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Vinci Brands LLC
Plaintiff and Counterclaim
Defendant,
v.
Coach Services Inc., Kate Spade, LLC,
Tapestry, Inc., and Case-Mate, Inc.,
Defendants, 23-CV-5138 (LGS) (VF)
and
Case-Mate, Inc., ORDER
Counterclaimant,
v.
Vinci Brands LLC, Candlewood Partners, LLC,
CWD Armor Management, LLC, Onward
Brands, LLC, and ACS Group Acquisitions,
LLC,
Counterclaim Defendants.
VALERIE FIGUEREDO, United States Magistrate Judge:
A telephone conference to address the ex parte dispute at ECF No. 861 is hereby
scheduled for Friday, July 25, 2025 at 11:00 a.m. Vinci Brands LLC’s (“Vinci”) former
counsel at Benesch Friedlander Coplan & Aranoff and its current counsel at Dickinson Wright
are directed to attend the telephone conference. Dial-in information will be sent directly to the
parties by e-mail.
The conference will be an ex parte proceeding because the dispute at ECF No. 861 could
require the disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege. The dispute stems
from the withdrawal of Vinci’s former counsel from the case. See ECF Nos. 822, 839, 841.
Motions to withdraw, and related papers, are “routinely filed under seal when necessary to
preserve the attorney-client relationship.” See, e.g., Broidy v. Glob. Risk Advisors LLC, No. 19-
CV-11861 (MKV) (JW), 2023 WL 5447267, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 24, 2023). Further, the
practice to hold ex parte proceedings or review documents in camera is “a practice both long-
standing and routine” in disputes implicating the attorney-client privilege. See, e.g., In re Grand
Jury Subpoenas Dated Mar. 19, 2002 & Aug. 2, 2002, 318 F.3d 379, 386 (2d Cir.2003).
The Court has reviewed the materials submitted at ECF No. 861, and the materials do not
appear to concern discovery in this case or Case-Mate and Kate Spade. Accordingly, Case-Mate,
Inc., Coach Services, Inc., Kate Spade LLC, and Tapestry, Inc. are not entitled, as of now, to
access the filing at ECF No. 861, and nor are they entitled to attend the conference on July 25,
2025. See Thekkek v. LaserSculpt, Inc., No. 11-CV-4426 (HB) (JLC), 2012 WL 2259724, at *3
(S.D.N.Y. Jan. 23, 2012) (allowing papers filed in support of a motion to withdraw to be filed ex
parte because “the confidential information they contain pertains only to the attorney-client
relationship”). The requests at ECF Nos. 866 and 868 are therefore denied. After the conference
on July 25, if it becomes apparent that an issue concerning Case-Mate or Kate Spade or
discovery in this matter is implicated, the Court can address whether the transcript of the July 25
conference should be unsealed or whether an additional conference with all of the parties should
be held. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 866.
SO ORDERED.
DATED: New York, New York \\ a \)
July 22, 2025 J WAR A
VALERIEFIGUEREDO
United States Magistrate Judge