Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_19-cv-04854/USCOURTS-azd-2_19-cv-04854-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

---

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

National Casualty Company,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Burns & Wilcox Limited, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-19-04854-PHX-DWL

ORDER 

Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulation to file under seal the 

declaration of Chelsea Davis in support of Defendants’ motions to dismiss (Doc. 38). 

The public has a general right to inspect judicial records and documents, such that a party 

seeking to seal a judicial record must overcome “a strong presumption in favor of 

access.” Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). To 

do so, the party must “articulate compelling reasons supported by specific factual 

findings that outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring 

disclosure . . . .” Id. at 1178-79 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). The 

Court must then “conscientiously balance the competing interests of the public and the 

party who seeks to keep certain judicial records secret.” Id. at 1179 (internal quotation 

marks omitted). “After considering these interests, if the court decides to seal certain 

judicial records, it must base its decision on a compelling reason and articulate the factual 

basis for its ruling, without relying on hypothesis or conjecture.” Id. (internal quotation 

marks omitted).

Case 2:19-cv-04854-DWL Document 44 Filed 01/21/20 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

The “stringent” compelling reasons standard applies to all filed motions and their 

attachments where the motion is “more than tangentially related to the merits of a case.” 

Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1096, 1101 (9th Cir. 2016). A

motion for full or partial summary judgment is clearly such a motion.

The Court finds that the parties have demonstrated compelling reasons to seal this 

declaration. Specifically, the Court is satisfied that the data concerning the premiums and 

commissions associated with policies that were sold pursuant to the Agency Agreement 

at issue in this case is not generally known and its public disclosure could harm the 

parties, and that this justifies sealing. Moreover, the declaration is short and responds 

directly to the declaration of Karen Eckrote (Doc. 37), which was sealed for the same 

reasons. (Doc. 36.)

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ stipulation to file under seal the declaration of 

Chelsea Davis in support of in support of Defendants’ motions to dismiss (Doc. 38) is 

granted. The Clerk of Court shall file under seal the Eckrote Declaration lodged at Doc. 

40.

Dated this 21st day of January, 2020.

Case 2:19-cv-04854-DWL Document 44 Filed 01/21/20 Page 2 of 2