Whether the district court docket should be sealed due to improper purposes and privacy expectations under Nixon v. Warner Communications precedent

1. Whether the district court docket should be sealed because the lower court failed to properly weigh Newsweek CEO Dev Pragad’s “spite” and “improper purposes” in favor of defendants under Supreme Court precedent set in Nixon v. Warner Communications, 435 U.S. 589 (1978), after he vowed to strike them with a media “nuclear bomb.” 2. Whether the district court docket should be sealed because the private defendants, engaged in private business, with an agreed upon private dispute resolution mechanism, had a “realistic expectation of privacy” under Supreme Court precedent set in Nixon v. Warner Communications, 435 U.S. 589 (1978). 3. Whether Newsweek’s intervention should be denied on procedural grounds under Supreme Court precedent related to the Federal Arbitration Act for a case predicated on binding arbitration clauses where the lower court’s subject matter jurisdiction was questioned.