Moeglein v. The Prudential Insurance Company of America

Filing 21

ORDER granting 20 Stipulation Motion to seal the administrative record. It is ordered that the administrative record may be filed and/or maintained under seal in this case. Signed by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (PM)

1

THE HONORABLE MARSHA J. PECHMAN

2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9

MARK MOEGLEIN,
Case No. 2:17-cv-00517-MJP

10

Plaintiff,

11
12
13

JOINT STIPULATED MOTION TO
SEAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

v.
THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE
COMPANY OF AMERICA,

NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR:
December 5, 2017

Defendant.

14
15

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(e) and Local Civil Rule 5(g), Plaintiff

16

Mark Moeglein and Defendant The Prudential Insurance Company of America hereby stipulate

17

and respectfully ask the Court to authorize the administrative record to be maintained under seal

18

to protect Mr. Moeglein’s privacy interests and sensitive medical information contained in the

19

record.

20

I. BACKGROUND & ARGUMENT

21

In this ERISA case, Mr. Moeglein seeks long-term disability benefits under a group

22

insurance policy. The underlying administrative record in this ERISA case is voluminous, and

23

contains extensive medical records and discussion of Mr. Moeglein’s medical conditions.

24

The Western District holds that—although Local Rule 5(g) establishes a “strong

25

presumption in favor of public access to the Court’s files” and the Ninth Circuit recognizes a

26

“strong presumption of public access to documents attached to dispositive motions”—the “need

27

to protect medical privacy qualifies in general as a ‘compelling reason’” to protect medical
JOINT STIPULATED MOTION TO SEAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
(No. 2:17-cv-00517) - 1

1

records and to file them under seal. Karpenski v. Am. Gen. Life Companies, LLC, 2013 WL

2

5588312, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 9, 2013) (quoting LCR 5(g) and Kamakana v. City and County

3

of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006)). In Karpenski, Chief Judge Martinez

4

determined the need to protect medical privacy qualifies as a “compelling reason” to grant a

5

motion to seal even under the heightened “compelling reasons” standard applicable in the context

6

of summary judgment motions. Id. Karpenski recognized that even if a plaintiff has put his

7

health at issue in a lawsuit, he nonetheless remains entitled to the court’s protection of sensitive

8

medical information. Id.; see also Macon v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 2013 WL 951013, at *5

9

(W.D. Wash. Mar. 12, 2013) (granting unopposed motion to seal medical records even where

10

plaintiff failed to comply with LCR 5(g) given the “private nature of the documents at issue”).

11

This approach has been followed by district courts throughout the Ninth Circuit. See, e.g., G. v.

12

Hawaii, 2010 WL 2607483 (D. Haw. 2010) (granting motion to seal, explaining that “[t]he need

13

to protect medical privacy qualifies as a ‘compelling reason.’”); Lombardi v. TriWest Healthcare

14

Alliance Corp., 2009 WL 1212170, at *1 (D. Ariz. 2009) (granting motion to seal documents that

15

“contain sensitive personal and medical information”); see also Skinner v. Ashan, 2007 WL

16

708972, *2 (D.N.J. Mar. 2, 2007) (observing that medical records “have long been recognized as

17

confidential in nature”).

18

In this case, compelling reasons to grant this joint motion to seal exist because the

19

administrative record contains extensive private medical records and discussion of Mr.

20

Moeglein’s private medical information. The parties have met and conferred in good faith about

21

the privacy interests at issue, and they agree that sealing the administrative record is appropriate

22

since redaction is not a reasonably feasible alternative due to the high volume of medical records

23

and medical information contained throughout the record. The parties anticipate citing to the

24

administrative record in connection with cross-motions to resolve this case.

25
26
27

II. CONCLUSION
In light of the foregoing, the parties jointly ask the Court to grant this stipulated joint
motion to seal and permit the administrative record to be maintained under seal in this case.
JOINT STIPULATED MOTION TO SEAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
(No. 2:17-cv-00517) - 2

1

DATED: December 5, 2017

2
ROY LAW
3
4
5
6

By s/ Christopher Roy
Christopher Roy, WSBA No. 14674
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff Mark Moeglein

7
8

LANE POWELL PC

9
10
11

By s/ David W. Howenstine
D. Michael Reilly, WSBA No. 14674
[e-mail]
David W. Howenstine, WSBA No. 41216
[e-mail]

12
13

Attorneys for Defendant The Prudential Insurance
Company of America

14
15

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP

16
17
18
19
20

By s/ Christopher Busey
Ian Morrison, Pro Hac Vice
[e-mail]
Christopher Busey, Pro Hac Vice
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant The Prudential Insurance
Company of America

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
JOINT STIPULATED MOTION TO SEAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
(No. 2:17-cv-00517) - 3

ORDER

1
2

IT IS SO ORDERED. The Court GRANTS the parties’ joint stipulated motion to seal

3

the administrative record and ORDERS that the administrative record may be filed and/or

4

maintained under seal in this case.

5

DATED this 6th day of December, 2017.

6
7
8
9

A
Marsha J. Pechman
United States District Judge

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
JOINT STIPULATED MOTION TO SEAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
(No. 2:17-cv-00517) - 4