Morris et al v. Tyson Chicken Inc et al, No. 4:2015cv00077 - Document 237 (W.D. Ky. 2020)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by Senior Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr. on 9/1/20; granting 231 Motion to Seal Document 231 MOTION for Leave to Seal Document 230 Response. cc: Counsel(DJT)

Download PDF
Morris et alCase v. Tyson Chicken Inc et al 4:15-cv-00077-JHM-HBB Document 237 Filed 09/01/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 8034 Doc. 237 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY OWENSBORO DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO: 4:15-CV-00077-JHM CHARLES MORRIS, et al. PLAINTIFFS V. TYSON CHICKEN, INC., et al. DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Seal Exhibits to its Response to Plaintiffs’ Counterstatements of Uncontroverted Fact. [DN 231]. Defendants seek to seal Table 3 and Figure 1 from Thomas Elam’s expert report, and Figures 8 and 9 from Walter Thurman’s expert report. [Id. at 2]. Fully briefed, the matter is ripe for decision. I. LEGAL STANDARD Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(d) allows courts to order that a filing be made under seal without redaction. Local Rule 5.6 also permits a party to move to file a document under seal. The Sixth Circuit “recognize[s] . . . a ‘strong presumption in favor of openness’ as to court records.” Shane Grp., Inc. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Mich., 825 F.3d 299, 305 (6th Cir. 2016) (citation omitted). The party that seeks to seal the records bears the heavy burden of overcoming that presumption where “[o]nly the most compelling reasons can justify non-disclosure of judicial records.” Id. (citations omitted). As such, “[t]o 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) (citation omitted). “Where a party can show a compelling reason for sealing, the party must then show why those reasons outweigh the public interest in access to those records Dockets.Justia.com Case 4:15-cv-00077-JHM-HBB Document 237 Filed 09/01/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 8035 and that the seal is narrowly tailored to serve that reason.” Id. (citation omitted). “To do so, the party must ‘analyze in detail, document by document, the propriety of secrecy, providing reasons and legal citations.’” Id. (citation omitted). If a district court opts to seal court records, “it must set forth specific findings and conclusions ‘which justify nondisclosure to the public.’” Rudd Equip. Co., Inc. v. John Deere Constr. & Forestry Co., 834 F.3d 589, 594 (6th Cir. 2016) (citation omitted). II. DISCUSSION “Courts can deny access to court records that could be used ‘as sources of business information that might harm a litigant's competitive standing.’” Caudill Seed & Warehouse Co., Inc. v. Jarrow Formulas, Inc., No. 3:13-CV-82-CRS-CHL, 2017 WL 3220470, at *2 (W.D. Ky. July 28, 2017) (citation omitted). Both Plaintiffs and Defendants agree that the table and figures Defendants seek to seal contain similar information to what this Court has already granted leave to seal—the Court agrees too. [DN 231 at 1, DN 233 at 1]. The table and figures contain confidential business information that could harm Tyson’s competitive standing, which outweighs the public’s interest in accessing the records. [See DN 218]. Defendants’ request is also narrowly tailored. Finally, the Court addressed Plaintiffs’ complaint [DN 233 at 1–2] that Defendants filed Thurman’s report unredacted on the public docket in a separate Memorandum Opinion and Order [DN 236]. III. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Defendants’ Motion to Seal Exhibits to its Response to Plaintiffs’ Counterstatements of Uncontroverted Fact [DN 231] is GRANTED. September 1, 2020 cc: counsel of record 2

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.