Karam v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company, No. 2:2020cv01435 - Document 11 (W.D. Wash. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER granting Parties' 10 Stipulated Motion to Seal: The parties shall now file the Administrative Record under seal. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (LH)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Karam v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company Doc. 11 Case 2:20-cv-01435-JLR Document 11 10 Filed 12/17/20 12/16/20 Page 1 of 6 7 Hon. James L. Robart 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 9 10 11 12 Plaintiff, 15 STIPULATED MOTION TO FILE THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD UNDER SEAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER v. 13 14 No. 2:20-cv-01435-JLR CLAUDE KARAM, HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR: December 16, 2020 Defendant. 16 17 18 For good cause, the parties respectfully move the Court to grant their 19 stipulated motion to allow the Administrative Record to be filed under seal. 20 21 STIPULATED MOTION TO FILE THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD UNDER SEAL 22 23 1. In light of COVID-19 precautionary measures, the parties elected to 24 satisfy their meet and confer requirement by teleconference, conducted on 25 December 1, 2020. The participants at this conference were: a) Jesse Cowell, 26 Attorney for Plaintiff; and b) Sarah Swale, Attorney for Defendant. STIPULATED MOTION TO FILE THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD UNDER SEAL ROY LAW GROUP 1000 SW Broadway, #900 Portland, OR 97205 TEL 503-206-4313 FAX 855-344-1726 www.roylawgroup.com Page 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:20-cv-01435-JLR Document 11 10 Filed 12/17/20 12/16/20 Page 2 of 6 7 1 2. First, Plaintiff submits, and Defendant does not dispute for 2 purposes of this case only, that a motion to seal the Administrative Record 3 (“AR” or “Administrative Record”) is justified in this case, because it involves a 4 dispute over Plaintiff’s eligibility for long-term disability (“LTD”) benefits 5 under an employee welfare benefit plan governed by the Employee Retirement 6 Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. §1001, et seq. (“ERISA”). This LTD benefits case 7 is analogous to Social-Security Appeals, in that the Administrative Record 8 contains highly sensitive medical information, protected under the Health 9 Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”). Plaintiff 10 asserts that, like Social-Security Appeals, the Plaintiff’s privacy interests far 11 outweigh the public interest in access to the files. Therefore, just as the public 12 is limited to accessing files in Social-Security Appeals under FRCP 5.2(c), 13 Plaintiff asserts that this motion to file the AR under seal is justified in this 14 LTD benefits case. In the interest of efficiency, and to avoid unnecessary 15 motions practice, Defendant agrees to filing the AR under seal in this matter. 16 In doing so, Defendant does not waive its right to assert in any other matter, 17 ERISA or otherwise, that the AR should not be filed under seal. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 3. Second, the parties agree that a motion to seal is far more economical, from both a human and financial resource perspective, than the alternative of redacting the Administrative Record. More specifically, the AR produced by Defendant will likely number in the thousands of pages and is peppered throughout with numerous references to Plaintiff’s social security number and date of birth, which would plainly require considerable time and effort to redact. Further, given Plaintiff’s assertion of the minimal public interest in accessing the highly sensitive medical information of the Plaintiff 25 that comprises a significant portion of the Administrative Record, the parties 26 STIPULATED MOTION TO FILE THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD UNDER SEAL Page 2 ROY LAW GROUP 1000 SW Broadway, #900 Portland, OR 97205 TEL 503-206-4313 FAX 855-344-1726 www.roylawgroup.com Case 2:20-cv-01435-JLR Document 11 10 Filed 12/17/20 12/16/20 Page 3 of 6 7 1 respectfully submit that the expense and burden of redaction outweighs the far 2 more economical option of simply filing the AR under seal in this matter. 3 4. Finally, given inefficiencies and added burdens affecting attorneys 4 and support staff for both parties due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the parties 5 are seeking relief from a potentially demanding redaction process to conserve 6 their already strained resources. The parties respectfully submit that the ready 7 and mutually agreeable alternative of filing the AR under seal will assist the 8 parties in doing so. 9 5. Pursuant to LCR 5(g)(3)(A), the parties certify that: 10 A. The conferencing details noted above are true and correct. 11 B. The need to file the Administrative Record was discussed 12 with particular emphasis on: 1) Plaintiff’s assertion that HIPAA privacy 13 considerations outweigh the public interest in this LTD benefits case, as 14 analogous to FRCP 5.2(c) treatment of Social-Security Appeals; and 15 2) undue burdens implicated by the alternative of redacting an 16 Administrative Record numbering in the thousands of pages, especially in 17 the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 C. Attempts to minimize the amount of material filed under seal would be impractical and unduly burdensome, since the Administrative Record is principally composed of either: 1) the highly sensitive medical records of Plaintiff; or 2) discussion of such highly sensitive information in the context of LTD benefits determinations. Further, the portions that would need to be redacted if they are not filed under seal are peppered over thousands of pages throughout the entire AR. The parties understand that FRCP 5.2(c) limits public access to the entire electronic 25 files of analogous Social-Security Appeals for similar reasons. 26 STIPULATED MOTION TO FILE THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD UNDER SEAL Page 3 ROY LAW GROUP 1000 SW Broadway, #900 Portland, OR 97205 TEL 503-206-4313 FAX 855-344-1726 www.roylawgroup.com Case 2:20-cv-01435-JLR Document 11 10 Filed 12/17/20 12/16/20 Page 4 of 6 7 D. 1 Redaction appears to be the only alternative to filing under 2 seal. And the parties agree that filing under seal is the better alternative 3 for the reasons specifically given above. 4 6. Pursuant to LCR 5(g)(3)(B), the parties agree for purposes of this 5 case only, and counsel provides the following declaration briefly describing 6 discussion that: 7 A. 8 By close analogy, FRCP 5.2(c) provides an applicable legal standard for filing the Administrative Record under seal. B. 9 More specifically, just as public access is limited to the highly 10 sensitive medical information which permeates the files of Social-Security 11 Appeals under FRCP 5.2(c), Plaintiff asserts that the legitimate privacy 12 interest of Plaintiff under the HIPAA in protecting highly sensitive 13 medical information within this LTD benefits case far outweighs any 14 legitimate public interest in free and unfettered access, thereby 15 warranting the relief of the Court’s allowance to file the Administrative 16 Record under seal. In the interest of efficiency, and to avoid unnecessary 17 motions practice, Defendant agrees to filing the AR under seal in this 18 matter. In doing so, Defendant does not waive its right to assert it any 19 20 21 22 23 24 other matter, ERISA or otherwise, that the AR should not be filed under seal. C. The injury that will result if the stipulated motion is not granted is twofold: 1) Plaintiff asserts, and Defendant does not dispute for purposes of this case only, that Plaintiff’s highly sensitive medical information would be unnecessarily available to public access, in likely violation of the HIPAA, which could also create irreparable harm by 25 misuse of such information by private persons and the publication of such 26 information; and 2) the parties would incur high and potentially STIPULATED MOTION TO FILE THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD UNDER SEAL Page 4 ROY LAW GROUP 1000 SW Broadway, #900 Portland, OR 97205 TEL 503-206-4313 FAX 855-344-1726 www.roylawgroup.com Case 2:20-cv-01435-JLR Document 11 10 Filed 12/17/20 12/16/20 Page 5 of 6 7 1 unnecessary expenditures of financial and human resources through the 2 alternative of redaction at a time of c continuing national crisis, when 3 both parties can ill afford to waste time and money. 4 D. The less restrictive alternative of redaction is not sufficient, 5 for the unduly burdensome reasons noted above. 6 In conclusion, for the reasons provided, the parties respectfully move the 7 8 Court to grant the stipulated motion to file the AR under seal. Respectfully submitted this 16th day of December, 2020. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ROY LAW GROUP s/ Jesse Cowell Jesse Cowell, WSBA 50725 Roy Law Group 1000 S.W. Broadway, Suite 900 Portland, OR 97205 PH: 503.206.4313 FAX: 855.344.1726 jesse@roylawgroup.com Attorneys for Plaintiff JENSEN MORSE BAKER PLLC 18 19 20 21 22 23 s/ Sarah E. Swale Sarah E. Swale, WSBA 29626 Jensen Morse Baker PLLC 1809 Seventh Avenue, Suite 410 Seattle, WA 98101 PH: 206.682.1644 FAX: 206.682.1496 sarah.swale@jmblawyers.com Attorneys for Defendant 24 25 26 STIPULATED MOTION TO FILE THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD UNDER SEAL Page 5 ROY LAW GROUP 1000 SW Broadway, #900 Portland, OR 97205 TEL 503-206-4313 FAX 855-344-1726 www.roylawgroup.com Case 2:20-cv-01435-JLR Document 11 10 Filed 12/17/20 12/16/20 Page 6 of 6 7 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 Based on the Stipulated Motion to File the Administrative Record under 3 4 Seal, it is hereby ORDERED that the stipulated motion is granted for good 5 cause shown and the parties shall now file the Administrative Record under 6 seal. 7 DATED: December 17, 2020. A 8 ____________________________ The Honorable James L. Robart United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 Presented by: ROY LAW GROUP 14 15 16 By: s/ Jesse Cowell Jesse Cowell, WSBA 50725 Attorney for Plaintiff 17 18 JENSEN MORSE BAKER PLLC 19 20 21 By: s/ Sarah E. Swale Sarah E. Swale, WSBA 29626 Attorney for Defendant 22 23 24 25 26 STIPULATED MOTION TO FILE THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD UNDER SEAL Page 6 ROY LAW GROUP 1000 SW Broadway, #900 Portland, OR 97205 TEL 503-206-4313 FAX 855-344-1726 www.roylawgroup.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
