Allied World Surplus Lines et al
Filing
109
ORDER denying Premera's 104 Motion to Seal. The Clerk of Court is directed to unseal Dkt. # 105 and # 106 . Signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (LH)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
6
7
8
PREMERA,
Plaintiff,
9
10
11
12
v.
LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, et
al.,
Cause No. C17-0714RSL
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
SEAL
Defendants.
13
14
15
This matter comes before the Court on Premera’s “Motion to Seal Exhibit E to the
16
Second Declaration of John R. Neeleman and Portions of Premera’s Reply in Support of Motion
17
18
19
20
to Partially Lift the Stay and to Bifurcate.” Dkt. # 104. Premera seeks to seal an agreement it
reached with its insurers to fund Premera’s defense of the underlying antitrust litigation and the
discussion of the agreement contained in its reply memorandum.
21
“There is a strong presumption of public access to the court’s files,” and, absent a
22
showing that the public’s right of access is outweighed by the interests of the public and/or the
23
24
25
26
parties in shielding the material from public view, a seal is not appropriate. LCR 5(g). Premera
has not made the required showing. Its bald assertion that the agreement is “proprietary
information” is unsupported by any facts or the context in which the agreement was negotiated.
27
Dkt. # 104 at 2. Its suggestion that the contents of the agreement are “property” does not justify a
28
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL - 1
1
seal. Dkt. # 104 at 2. Despite citing to relevant legal authority, Premera makes no effort to show
2
that the agreement contains “sources of business information that might harm a litigant’s
3
competitive standing.” Dkt. # 104 at 3 (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589,
4
5
6
7
598 (1978)). The insurers, who are parties to the agreement, filed their discussion of the
negotiations and agreement without seal and without objection from Premera.
Premera has not shown that legitimate private or public interests warrant a seal, that
8
injury would result from public disclosure, or that the public’s right of access should give way.
9
The motion to seal is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to unseal Dkt. # 105 and # 106.
10
11
12
13
14
Dated this 1st day of February, 2021.
Robert S. Lasnik
United States District Judge
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL - 2
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?