McGinnes et al v. FirstGroup America, Inc. et al

Filing 121

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO SEAL (Doc. 110 , 118 ): Defendants' Motions (Doc. 110 , 118 ) are GRANTED. The Court ORDERS Defendants to file redacted versions of the transcripts of the August 25, 2022 Deposition of Samu el W. Halpern and the August 30, 2022 Deposition of Brian Charles Becker, Ph. D. on the public docket. However, Defendants MAY FILE unredacted versions of the following depositions UNDER SEAL:(1) August 25, 2022 Deposition of Samuel W. Halper n;(2) August 30, 2022 Deposition of Brian Charles Becker, Ph. D.;(3) Deposition of Clinton Cary (Doc. 103 );(4) Deposition of Joan Bougton (Doc. 104 );(5) Deposition of Drew McCorkle (Doc. 105 ); and(6) Deposition of Ryan Neff (Doc. 106 );Additionally, the Clerk SHALL SEAL the following docket entries:(1) Exhibit 59 to the Declaration of David M. Rosenberg (Doc. 109 -59);(2) Exhibit 60 to the Declaration of David M. Rosenberg (Doc. 109 -60); and(3) Exhibit 62 to the Deposition of David M. Rosenberg (Doc. 109 -62).IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Matthew W. McFarland on 10/26/2022. (kaf)

Case: 1:18-cv-00326-MWM Doc #: 121 Filed: 10/26/22 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: 7425

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION – CINCINNATI
WENDY BERRY, et al.,

:
Case No. 1:18-cv-326
:
Plaintiffs,
:
Judge Matthew W. McFarland
:
v.
:
:
FIRSTGROUP AMERICA, INC.,
:
et al.,
:
:
Defendants.
:
:
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO SEAL (Doc. 110, 118)
______________________________________________________________________________
The matter is before the Court on the FirstGroup America Defendants’ Motion to
Seal (Doc. 110) and Defendant Aon Hewitt Investment Consulting’s Motion for Leave to
File Under Seal (Doc. 118). Many of the documents the parties wish to seal overlap. First,
Defendant seek leave from the Court to file unredacted versions of redacted deposition
already filed on the public docket under seal. Next, Defendants seek leave from the Court
to (1) file redacted versions of two deposition on the public docket and, thereafter, (2) file
the unredacted versions of the two depositions under seal. Lastly, Defendants request
three exhibits to the Declaration of David M. Rosenberg be sealed by the Court. For the
following reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motions (Docs. 110, 118).
Federal courts have long recognized a strong presumption in favor of openness
which can only be overcome by “the most compelling reasons.” Shane Group., Inc. v. Blue
Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, 825 F.3d 299, 305 (6th Cir. 2016) (citing In re Knoxville News-

Case: 1:18-cv-00326-MWM Doc #: 121 Filed: 10/26/22 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: 7426

Sentinel Co., 723 F.2d 470, 476 (6th Cir. 1983)). Accordingly, “[t]he burden of overcoming
that presumption is borne by the party that seeks to seal them.” Brown & Williamson
Tobacco Corp. v. F.T.C., 710 F.2d 1165, 1180 (6th Cir. 1983). “To meet this burden, the party
must show three things: (1) a compelling interest in sealing the records; (2) that the
interest in sealing outweighs the public’s interest in accessing the records; and (3) that the
request is narrowly tailored.” Kondash v. Kia Motors Am., Inc., 767 F. App'x 635, 637 (6th
Cir. 2019). To do so, the party must “analyze in detail, document by document, the
propriety of secrecy, providing reasons and legal citations.” Id. (citing Shane Group., 825
F.3d at 305). And typically, in civil litigation, only trade secrets, information covered by
a recognized privilege, and information required by statute to be maintained in
confidence is typically enough to overcome this presumption. Shane Group., 825 F.3d at
305.
Considering that the documents and deposition transcripts in question that
Defendants seek to seal contain or reference confidential or highly confidential
information identified by all parties in this case, Defendants have demonstrated that (1)
compelling interests exist to seal the documents and deposition transcripts, (2) such
interests outweigh the public’s interest in accessing the documents or deposition
transcripts, and (3) Defendants’ requests are narrowly tailored. Therefore, Defendants’
Motions (Doc. 110, 118) are GRANTED.
The Court ORDERS Defendants to file redacted versions of the transcripts of the
August 25, 2022 Deposition of Samuel W. Halpern and the August 30, 2022 Deposition of
Brian Charles Becker, Ph. D. on the public docket. However, Defendants MAY FILE
2

Case: 1:18-cv-00326-MWM Doc #: 121 Filed: 10/26/22 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: 7427

unredacted versions of the following depositions UNDER SEAL:
(1) August 25, 2022 Deposition of Samuel W. Halpern;
(2) August 30, 2022 Deposition of Brian Charles Becker, Ph. D.;
(3) Deposition of Clinton Cary (Doc. 103);
(4) Deposition of Joan Bougton (Doc. 104);
(5) Deposition of Drew McCorkle (Doc. 105); and
(6) Deposition of Ryan Neff (Doc. 106);
Additionally, the Clerk SHALL SEAL the following docket entries:
(1) Exhibit 59 to the Declaration of David M. Rosenberg (Doc. 109-59);
(2) Exhibit 60 to the Declaration of David M. Rosenberg (Doc. 109-60); and
(3) Exhibit 62 to the Deposition of David M. Rosenberg (Doc. 109-62).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
By: /s/ Matthew W. McFarland
JUDGE MATTHEW W. McFARLAND

3