Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02559/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02559-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits

---

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

Richard Wallace, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

The Bashas’ Inc. Group Disability Plan, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-2559-PHX-JAT

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion to seal several exhibits attached to

the statement of facts in support of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff has

joined the motion. The justification for sealing is that the documents are “medication records

containing sensitive and personal information, including Plaintiff’s date of birth and social

security numbers [sic], which should be treated as confidential information.” Doc. #18 at 1.

To file any part of a motion for summary judgment under seal, the party seeking to

seal must show “compelling reasons” to overcome the strong presumption in favor of public

access to court filings. See Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179

(9th Cir. 2006).

That is, the party must articulate compelling reasons supported by specific

factual findings... that outweigh the general history of access and the public

policies favoring disclosure, such as the public interest in understanding the

judicial process. In turn, the court must conscientiously balance the competing

interests of the public and the party who seeks to keep certain judicial records

secret. 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.

In general, compelling reasons sufficient to outweigh the public’s interest in

disclosure and justify sealing court records exist when such court files have

become a vehicle for improper purposes, such as the use of records to gratify

Case 2:07-cv-02559-JAT Document 20 Filed 04/21/09 Page 1 of 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

- 2 -

private spite, promote public scandal, circulate libelous statements, or release

trade secrets. The mere fact that the production of records may lead to a

litigant’s embarrassment, incrimination, or exposure to further litigation will

not, without more, compel the court to seal its records.

Id. at 1178-79 (internal citations and quotations omitted).

In this case, the Court agrees that Plaintiff’s date of birth and social security number

need not be made part of the public record. However, that result can be accomplished by

redacting those specific parts of an exhibit, rather than sealing the entire exhibit. Beyond

those specifics, the Court finds Defendant has not shown compelling reasons to seal. First,

Defendant has not made a showing with the particularity that the Court of Appeals requires

on an exhibit by exhibit basis. Second, although public access to Plaintiff’s private medical

records might cause embarrassment, embarrassment is not a basis for sealing. Further, any

possible embarrassment is purely speculative on this record. Finally, neither party makes any

claim that the Court’s records are being used for any improper purpose. Thus, the motion

to seal the entire exhibits will be denied.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the motion to seal (Doc. #18) is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the lodged statement of facts (Doc. #17) is

stricken from the record.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant shall file a statement of facts in

support of its motion for summary judgment by April 30, 2009; Defendant may redact

Plaintiff’s date of birth and social security number from all exhibits, but shall not file any

entire exhibit under seal.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order shall not be sealed.

DATED this 21st day of April, 2009.

Case 2:07-cv-02559-JAT Document 20 Filed 04/21/09 Page 2 of 2