Bitgo Holdings, Inc. v. Galaxy Digital Holdings, LP

── Bitgo Holdings, Inc. v. Galaxy Digital Holdings, LP ── Court: Court of Chancery of Delaware Date: April 13, 2026 Category: General COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE KATHALEEN ST. JUDE MCCORMICK LEONARD L. WILLIAMS JUSTICE CENTER CHANCELLOR 500 N. KING STREET, SUITE 11400 WILMINGTON, DELAWARE 19801-3734 April 13, 2026 Michael A. Barlow Bradley R. Aronstam Veronica B. Bartholomew S. Michael Sirkin Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Kevin A. Rudolph Sullivan, LLP Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP 500 Delaware Avenue, Suite 220 Hercules Building Wilmington, DE 19801 1313 North Market Street, Suite 1001 Wilmington, DE 19801 A. Thompson Bayliss Eliezer Y. Feinstein Kimberly A. Evans Abrams & Bayliss LLP Lindsay K. Faccenda 20 Montchanin Road, Suite 200 Daniel M. Baker Wilmington, DE 19807 Robert Erikson Block & Leviton LLP 222 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1120 Wilmington, DE 19801 Re: BitGo Holdings, Inc. v. Galaxy Digital Holdings, LP, et al., C.A. No. 2022-0808-KSJM Dear Counsel: Non-party Pro Publica, Inc. challenged redactions in eight deposition transcripts that the parties filed in connection with Defendants’ request for leave to move for summary judgment.1 In response, the parties each filed Motions for Continued Confidential Treatment.2 This letter grants both motions. “Under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and as a matter of common law, the public has a presumptive right of access to judicial 1 C.A. No. 2022-0808-KSJM, Docket (“Dkt.”) 207; see also Dkt. 174 (Letter Requesting Leave to Move for Summary Judgment). 2 Dkts. 210–11. C.A. No. 2022-0808-KSJM April 13, 2026 Page 2 of 5 records.”3 The public’s right of access to court documents and proceedings is “considered fundamental to a democratic state and necessary in the long run so that the public can judge the product of the courts in a given case.”4 Court of Chancery Rule 5.1 reflects the Court of Chancery’s commitment to the public’s right of access.5 The default presumption under Rule 5.1 is that court proceedings and filings are public record.6 Rule 5.1 allows parties to file documents containing confidential information under seal (a “Confidential Filing”), but requires a public version “for every Confidential Filing, except for an exhibit or lodged deposition.”7 In public versions of Confidential Filings, parties may redact only information that they believe constitutes “Confidential Information” as defined by Rule 5.1.8 “Confidential Information” under Rule 5.1 means information: (A) that is maintained confidentially; (B) that is not otherwise publicly available; (C) where public access to the information will cause particularized harm; and (D) where the magnitude of the harm from public access to the information outweighs the public interest in the information.9 3 In re Columbia Pipeline Gp., Inc., 2018 WL 4182207, at *1 (Del. Ch. Aug. 30, 2018). 4 Al Jazeera Am., LLC v. AT & T Servs., Inc., 2013 WL 5614284, at *3 (Del. Ch. Oct. 14, 2013) (internal quotation marks omitted). 5 Horres v. Chick-fil-A, Inc., 2013 WL 1223605, at *2 (Del