In a legal showdown that has the business world buzzing, steel giant Cleveland Cliffs Inc. and iron ore miner Mesabi Metallics Co. LLC are embroiled in a dispute that hinges on the unsealing of confidential documents. The Third Circuit’s recent intervention has added a layer of suspense to this high-stakes drama, as it grapples with the question of when to reveal confidential court records to the public.
Cleveland Cliffs VS Mesabi Metallics : Appellate Court Puts the Brakes On
Cleveland Cliffs sought the intervention of the appellate court, a move that Mesabi Metallics did not oppose. The catalyst for this legal whirlwind was U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Craig T. Goldblatt’s order to unseal the documents by October 23, while also certifying a direct appeal. The judge cited the absence of controlling precedent as a factor in his decision.
A Sealing Agreement Upended
Cleveland Cliffs contends that Mesabi Metallics initially agreed to the sealing of these documents during previous efforts to thwart Cliffs from securing a mining lease with the state of Minnesota after the bankruptcy of Mesabi’s predecessor, Essar Steel. Following an injunction order defeat, Cliffs asserts that Mesabi had a change of heart and requested the court to unseal the records, aiming to contest Cliffs’ lease bid in Minnesota state court.
Stakeholder Arguments Unveiled
Mesabi Metallics, which adopted its name while Essar Steel was still mired in bankruptcy in 2016, argues that the disputed state leases encompass land that Cliffs never developed, choosing instead to divide a larger tract coveted by Mesabi for its own iron ore plant project. Mesabi’s position emphasizes the documents’ content, asserting that they mainly consist of dated emails and attachments discussing Cliffs’ plans to thwart Mesabi. These records are not the sensitive customer contracts or pricing plans that Cliffs purports them to be.
Cleveland Cliffs VS Mesabi Metallics :Judge’s Dilemma
Judge Goldblatt, in his September 22 ruling, appeared to grapple with a complex decision. On the one hand, he acknowledged the common law right of public access to judicial records, relying on the Third Circuit’s 2019 decision in In re Avandia Mktg. This decision presumed a right of access, even when protective orders were in place for confidential discovery. Yet, he also expressed concern about a party strategically exploiting public access to circumvent protective orders.
Cleveland Cliffs VS Mesabi Metallics: Cliffs’ Appeal Arguments
Cleveland Cliffs argued that the appellate court’s decision to stay the unsealing should consider factors such as the likelihood of success, the risk of irreparable harm, the balance of “equities,” and the public interest. They challenged the bankruptcy court’s broad reading of Avandia, suggesting that it could lead to the misuse of information and protective orders being undermined.
Cleveland Cliffs VS Mesabi Metallics : Mesabi’s Defense
In response, Mesabi contended that Cliffs no longer operates as an “iron ore supplier” but produces steel and uses its mined ore in-house. They argued that releasing the documents would not cause Cliffs the severe injury required to maintain the records’ seal, as Avandia stipulates. They also signaled that the case revolves around Cliffs’ alleged anticompetitive behavior, necessitating the withdrawal of the reference to the bankruptcy court.
The Larger Context
This legal spectacle is set against the backdrop of a broader narrative. Essar Steel’s mineral lease rights in Minnesota’s “Iron Range” were acquired by Chippewa Capital Partners LLC in a $1 billion Chapter 11 deal in 2017. Subsequently, these leases were awarded to Cleveland Cliffs Inc. following a protracted legal battle that reached the state’s Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the growing Cleveland Cliffs recently made waves by offering $7.25 billion to purchase U.S. Steel.
Legal Eagles at the Helm
Mesabi Metallics Co. LLC is represented by a legal team from White & Case LLP, including Mark Gustafson, David H. Suggs, and Kathryn Swisher. On the other side of the courtroom, Cleveland Cliffs Inc. is represented by attorneys from Jones Day LLP, including Robert S. Faxon, Kristin S.M. Morrison, and James R. Saywell.
