Filing 185

MARGINAL ENTRY re 178 MOTION to Seal Document (see Entry). Signed by Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker on 6/22/2011.(SWM)

Download PDF
Case 1:05-cv-01908-TWP-TAB Document 441 Filed 06/20/11 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 15708 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION MARY ORMOND, et al., On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, vs. ANTHEM, INC., et al., Defendants. _______________________________________ JEFFREY D. JORLING, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, vs. ANTHEM, INC., et al., Case No. 1:05-cv-1908-TWP-TAB As stated recently in the related case 09-798 [Docket No. 172], a review of the exhibits sought to be filed under Case No. 1:05-cv-01908-TWP-TAB seal suggests that many of the documents sought to be sealed by the instant motion may not be properly sealed. In fact, in this case it is difficult for the Court to discern why any of these documents should be sealed, irrespective of the confidentiality designation and protective order. For example, a portion of Exhibit 8 references deposition testimony setting forth Webster's Dictionary's definition of the word "authoritative." That definition, of course, is readily available public information, rather than something so highly confidential that it must be sealed from public view. Accordingly, any party that seeks to have any documents subject to this motion remain under seal shall show cause by July 6, 2011, why the documents should not be unsealed. Tim A. Baker Case No. 1:09-cv-00798-TWP-TAB U.S. Magistrate Judge June 22, 2011 Case No. 1:09-cv-798-TWP-TAB Defendants. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MATERIALS UNDER SEAL Plaintiffs, Mary Ormond, et al. and Jeffrey D. Jorling, respectfully submit their Motion for Leave to File Materials Under Seal, and state as follows: 1. Counsel for Plaintiffs and Defendants filed a Joint Motion for Protective Order on July 2, 2010. Docket #60. 2. On June 20, 2011, contemporaneous with this filing, Plaintiffs filed a Reply in Support of their Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. The evidentiary materials relied upon by Plaintiffs that Plaintiffs seek to file under seal have been designated as “Confidential” according to the terms of the Agreed Protective Order. 3. The sealed materials are being filed contemporaneously herewith as Plaintiffs’ Designation of Sealed Evidence in Support of their Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court accept for filing under seal Plaintiffs’ Designation of Sealed Exhibits in support of their Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Eric H. Zagrans Eric H. Zagrans ZAGRANS LAW FIRM LLC 24500 Chagrin Blvd., Suite 200 Cleveland, OH 44122 (216) 763-0090 (telephone) (e-mail) and Edward O. DeLaney (4466-49) Kathleen A. DeLaney (18604-49) DELANEY & DELANEY LLC 3646 N. Washington Boulevard Indianapolis, Indiana 46205 (317) 920-0400 (telephone) (e-mail) (e-mail) and Michael F. Becker BECKER LAW FIRM L.P.A. 134 Middle Avenue Elyria, Ohio 44035 (440) 323-7070 (telephone) 2 (e-mail) and Dennis P. Barron 582 Torrence Lane Cincinnati, Ohio 45208 (513) 871-2369 (telephone) (e-mail) and Lynn L. Sarko T. David Copley Cari C. Laufenberg KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101-3052 (206) 623-1900 (telephone) and H. Laddie Montague Todd S. Collins Peter R. Kahana BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C. 1622 Locust Street Philadelphia, PA 19103-6365 (215) 875-3000 (telephone) (e-mail) (e-mail) (e-mail) Attorneys for Plaintiffs 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that the foregoing was filed electronically on June 20, 2011. Notice of this filing will be sent by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system to the following parties who may access this filing through the Court’s system: Christopher G. Scanlon ( Paul A. Wolfla ( Craig A. Hoover ( Peter R. Bisio ( Adam K. Levin ( Attorneys for Defendants /s/ Eric H. Zagrans Eric H. Zagrans 4

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?