Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_19-cv-02236/USCOURTS-azd-2_19-cv-02236-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 899
Nature of Suit: Other Statutes - Administrative Procedure Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision
Cause of Action: 05:702 Administrative Procedure Act

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

MD Helicopters Incorporated,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

United States of America, et al., 

Defendants.

No. CV-19-02236-PHX-JAT

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court are Defendants’ the United States of America, Patrick M. 

Shanahan, in his capacity as Acting Secretary of Defense, the U.S. Department of Army, 

and Mark T. Esper, in his capacity as Secretary of the Army (collectively, “Defendants”) 

Motion to File Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Under Seal (Doc. 85) 

and Intervenor Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation’s (“Sikorsky”) Motion to File Its Proposed 

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Under Seal (Doc. 89). 

 Defendants’ Motion states that its Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of 

Law necessarily references portions of the administrative record which the Court 

previously sealed in its June 7, 2019 Order (Doc. 81). (Doc. 85 at 2). Accordingly, 

Defendants ask that the Court seal its Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 

to protect the information contained therein that is sensitive and protected from disclosure 

by statute and the Protective Order entered in this case. (Id. at 3). The Court will grant 

Defendants’ Motion (Doc. 85) for the reasons stated in the Court’s June 7, 2019 Order 

(Doc. 81). 

Case 2:19-cv-02236-JAT Document 92 Filed 06/12/19 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 Sikorsky’s Motion avers that its Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 

contains factual material and argument consisting of information protected from disclosure 

pursuant to the Protective Order entered in this case and pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(h), 

which incorporates the Procurement Integrity Act, 41 U.S.C. § 2102. (Doc. 89 at 2). 

Sikorsky also states that the disclosure of the source selection information contained in this 

record may also be subject to claims of trade secret protection by Plaintiff. (Id.). The Court 

will grant Sikorsky’s Motion (Doc. 89) for the reasons stated in the Court’s June 7, 2019 

Order (Doc. 81). 

 Finding “compelling reasons” to do so, Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 

447 F.3d 1172, 1180 (9th Cir. 2006), 

IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to File Proposed Findings of Fact and 

Conclusions of Law Under Seal (Doc. 85) is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Sikorsky’s Motion to File Its Proposed 

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Under Seal (Doc. 89) is GRANTED. 

 Dated this 12th day of June, 2019. 

Case 2:19-cv-02236-JAT Document 92 Filed 06/12/19 Page 2 of 2