1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

IN RE: DAVOL, INC./C.R. BARD, 

INC., POLYPROPYLENE HERNIA 

MESH PRODUCTS LIABILITY 

LITIGATION

This document relates to: 

ALL ACTIONS.

 Case No. 2:18-md-2846 

 JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.

 Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL

This matter is before the Court on Leger Ketchum & Cohoon PLLC, Constant Legal Group, 

LLP, and Defendants C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.’s joint Motion for Leave to File Under Seal 

an Agreed Motion to Establish a Qualified Settlement Fund, to Appoint Settlement Claims 

Administrator, and to Issue Related Relief (ECF No. 846). The parties argue that the Agreed 

Motion to Establish a Qualified Settlement Fund, to Appoint Settlement Claims Administrator, 

and to Issue Related Relief (“QSF Motion”) should be filed under seal because disclosure of the 

information “offers no benefits to the public at large and would interfere with the privacy interests 

of the Parties.” (Id. at PageID #9419.) 

“Unlike information merely exchanged between the parties, ‘[t]he public has a strong 

interest in obtaining the information contained in the court record.’” Shane Grp., Inc. v. Blue 

Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, 825 F.3d 299, 305 (6th Cir. 2016) (quoting Brown & Williamson 

Tobacco Corp. v. F.T.C., 710 F.2d 1165, 1180 (6th Cir. 1983)). For this reason, the moving party 

has a “heavy” burden of overcoming a “‘strong presumption in favor of openness’ as to court 

records.” Shane Grp., 825 F.3d at 305 (quoting Brown & Williamson, 710 F.2d at 1179); see also 

id. (“Only the most compelling reasons can justify non-disclosure of judicial records.” (quotation 

Case: 2:18-md-02846-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 847 Filed: 07/01/24 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: 9427
2

omitted)). “A movant’s obligation to provide compelling reasons justifying the seal exists even if 

the parties agree the filings should be sealed, because litigants cannot waive the public’s First 

Amendment and common law right of access to court filings.” Proctor & Gamble Co. v. Ranir, 

LLC, No. 1:17-CV-185, 2017 WL 3537195, at *2 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 17, 2017) (citing Rudd Equip. 

Co. v. John Deere Constr. & Forestry Co., 834 F.3d 589, 595 (6th Cir. 2016)). “[T]he greater the 

public interest in the litigation’s subject matter, the greater the showing necessary to overcome the 

presumption of access.” Shane Grp., 825 F.3d at 305 (citation omitted). “[I]n civil litigation, only 

trade secrets, information covered by a recognized privilege (such as the attorney-client privilege), 

and information required by statute to be maintained in confidence (such as the name of a minor 

victim of a sexual assault), is typically enough to overcome the presumption of access.” Shane 

Grp., 825 F.3d at 308 (citation and quotations omitted). The Court’s obligation to keep its records 

open for public inspection “is not conditioned upon the desires of the parties to the case.” 

Language Access Network v. CulturaLink, No. 2:19-CV-194, 2021 WL 5298048, at *1 (S.D. Ohio 

Nov. 15, 2021) (quoting Harrison v. Proctor & Gamble Co., No. 1:15-CV-514, 2017 WL 

11454396, at *1–2 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 11, 2017).)

The parties here have not shown that the high standard for nondisclosure set out in Shane 

Group, Inc. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan has been met. The desire of Defendants and of 

this particular group of plaintiffs to keep the terms of the QSF Motion secret from other plaintiffs 

in this MDL (ECF No. 846 at PageID #9422), and claimed unfair prejudice to these parties (id.), 

do not fall into the category of “[o]nly the most compelling reasons,” and do not overcome the 

“strong presumption of openness.” Shane Grp., 825 F.3d at 305. This Court has ruled multiple 

times in this MDL that claims that a document would be “highly prejudicial” are insufficient to 

Case: 2:18-md-02846-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 847 Filed: 07/01/24 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: 9428
3 

establish that a document should be sealed. (See, e.g., Case No. 18-cv-1022, ECF No. 149 at 

PageID #6041; Case No. 18-cv-1320, ECF No. 341 at PageID #18772.) 

Accordingly, Leger Ketchum & Cohoon PLLC, Constant Legal Group, LLP, and 

Defendants C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.’s joint Motion for Leave to File Under Seal an Agreed 

Motion to Establish a Qualified Settlement Fund, to Appoint Settlement Claims Administrator, 

and to Issue Related Relief (ECF No. 846) is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7/1/2024 s/Edmund A. Sargus, Jr. 

DATE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case: 2:18-md-02846-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 847 Filed: 07/01/24 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: 9429