Order | Filed: January 16, 2026
| Entered: January 16, 2026
Lenzi v. Systemax, Inc. et al
Labor: Fair Standards | New York Eastern
Order on Motion to Unseal Document
ORDER GRANTING Motion to Unseal (DE 209 ); GRANTING Proposed Unsealing Order (DE 212 ).
This case is more than eleven years old and has generated several hundred docket entries. On 10/9/2025, Plaintiff Daniel Lenzi filed an appeal in this case. See DE 207 . On 10/21/2025, Plaintiff's former counsel, Valli Kane & Vagnini LLP (VKV), filed its cross-appeal. See DE 208 . Defendants Systemax, Inc., Richard Leeds, and Lawrence P. Reinhold have not filed an appeal.
Presently before the undersigned is the Plaintiff's motion for the limited unsealing of certain docket entries for purposes of inclusion in the appendix for the pending appeals. See DE 209 . At the Court's direction, VKV and Defendants have purported to explain their opposition to aspects of Plaintiff's partial unsealing motion (see DE 210 ; DE 211 ), and Plaintiff has replied to VKV and Defendants' arguments (see DE 213 ).
First, Plaintiff moves--with VKV and Defendants' consent--for "a limited unsealing of ECF Docket Numbers 135 (including attachments), 137 (including attachments), 138, 163, 172 (including attachments), and 173 (including attachments) to permit counsel of record access to download these documents solely for the purpose of preparation of a sealed volume of the Appendix; provided, however, that ECF Nos. 135, 137, 138, 163, 172, and 173, and all attachments, shall otherwise remain under seal and inaccessible to the public." DE 210 at 1-2. On the parties' consent, this request is GRANTED.
Second, Plaintiff moves--over the objections of VKV and Defendants--for "a limited unsealing of ECF Docket Numbers 171, 188, 202, and 203 to permit only undersigned counsel, Mr. Michael James Maloney, Esq., access to download these documents solely for the purpose of preparation of a separate sealed volume of the Appendix; provided, however, that ECF Nos. 171, 188, 202 and 203 shall otherwise remain sealed ex parte and inaccessible to counsel for any other party or the public." Id. at 2.The Court finds that Plaintiff's second request is well-founded and, by contrast, VKV and Defendants' opposition is without merit. The undersigned declines to spill an excessive amount of the proverbial ink on this latest dispute between Plaintiff, Defendants, and VKV. The record on appeal is clearly defined to include "the original papers and exhibits filed in the district court." Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a)(1); See Stevens v. City of Oneonta, No. 24-2334, 2025 WL 1466186, at *1 n.1 (2d Cir. May 22, 2025) (same). It is undisputed that all of the documents cited in the Proposed Unsealing Order (DE 212 ) are "original papers and exhibits filed in the district court."
Furthermore, in the Court's opinion, the purported opposition to Plaintiff's second unsealing request is an improper attempt by VKV and Defendants to relitigate issues previously addressed by the undersigned. Regarding VKV's arguments as to what the undersigned did (or did not) consider in connection with the rulings now subject to the pending appeals and as to what VKV did (or did not) have access to when litigating this case before the undersigned, those arguments (assuming they are made in good faith) are properly raised before the Second Circuit on appeal. In essence, VKV uses its opposition to get a second bite at the apple on the Court's prior rulings that are now subject to the pending appeals by Plaintiff and VKV. The unde... (truncated)
Response | Filed: January 15, 2026
| Entered: January 15, 2026
Lenzi v. Systemax, Inc. et al
Labor: Fair Standards | New York Eastern
Reply in Support
REPLY in Support re 209 MOTION to Unseal Document 202 1 - Exparte Document CV, Letter, 1 - Sealed Document CV filed by Danielle Lenzi, 172 1 - Sealed Document CV,,, Reply in Support,, filed by Danielle Lenzi, 171 1 - Exparte Document CV, Letter filed by Danielle, Order,, filed by Danielle Lenzi. (Maloney, Michael)