Blue Cross Blue Shield Association National Employee Benefits Committee v. Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC

S.D. New York

Blue Cross Blue Shield Association National Employee Benefits Committee v. Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC

DecidedJanuary 4, 2022

Docket1:20-cv-07606

StatusUnknown

This text of Blue Cross Blue Shield Association National Employee Benefits Committee v. Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC (Blue Cross Blue Shield Association National Employee Benefits Committee v. Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Blue Cross Blue Shield Association National Employee Benefits Committee v. Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

BartlitBeck.- Sean W. Gallagher Sean.Gallagher@BartlitBeck.com

January 3, 2022 Courthouse Place 54 West Hubbard Street Chicago, IL 60654 Via ECF main: (312) 494-4400 direct: (312) 494-4428 BartlitBeck.com Hon. Katherine Polk Failla United States District Court Southern District of New York MEMO ENDORSED 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 Re: NEBCy. Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC et al., No. 20 Civ. 07606 Dear Judge Failla, In connection with NEBC’s pre-conference letter in opposition filed on January 3, 2022, NEBC respectfully requests leave to file certain exhibits under seal pursuant to Section IX of the Stipulated Second Amended Protective Order (the “Protective Order,” Dkt. 115) and Rule 9 of the Court’s Individual Rules of Practice in Civil Cases. Specifically, NEBC seeks to file under seal the following exhibit: Exhibit 1: Document produced by NEBC with Bates number NEBC0019286, which NEBC has designated “Confidential.” Exhibit 1 includes material that has been designated “Confidential” under the Protective Order. The Protective Order permits the parties to designate certain categories of sensitive information produced in the course of discovery as “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential,” with all such material referred to collectively as “Protected Material.” Protective Order § IV. The Protective Order requires that “[a] Party or Non-Party submitting any Protected Material to the Court in the Related Actions (whether in support of a pleading or motion, at a hearing, or in connection with any other pre-trial proceeding) must file the Protected Material in redacted form or under seal to the full extent permitted by the Local Rules of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and Judge Failla’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases.” Jd. § [X.A. The weight of the presumption that documents will be publicly filed is “not particularly great” where, as here, “[t]he documents are not to be submitted in connection with a dispositive motion, but merely a motion to compel further discovery from a party.” Alexander Interactive, Inc. v. Adorama, Inc., 2014 WL 4346174, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 2014). In addition, Exhibit 1 is a document that NEBC has produced and designated “Confidential” because it contains sensitive, non-public information regarding NEBC’s organization and operation. Cf City of Almaty, Kazakhstan v. Ablyazov, 2021 WL 1177737, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2021) (granting motion to seal documents relating to company’s “internal strategic discussions”).

Accordingly, NEBC requests leave to file Exhibit 1 under seal.

Very truly yours,

Sean W. Gallagher Counsel for Plaintiff Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association National Employee Benefits Committee

cc: Counsel of record on ECF

Application GRANTED. The above-specified exhibit associated with Plaintiff's submission shall be permitted to be filed under seal, viewable only to the parties and the Court. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 137. Date: January 4, 2022 SO ORDERED. New York, New York

HON. KATHERINE POLK FAILLA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BartlitBeck.- Sean W. Gallagher Sean.Gallagher@BartlitBeck.com

January 3, 2022 Courthouse Place 54 West Hubbard Street Chicago, IL 60654 Via ECF main: (312) 494-4400 direct: (312) 494-4428 BartlitBeck.com Hon. Katherine Polk Failla United States District Court Southern District of New York MEMO ENDORSED 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 Re: NEBCy. Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC et al., No. 20 Civ. 07606 Dear Judge Failla, In connection with NEBC’s pre-conference letter in opposition filed on January 3, 2022, NEBC respectfully requests leave to file certain exhibits under seal pursuant to Section IX of the Stipulated Second Amended Protective Order (the “Protective Order,” Dkt. 115) and Rule 9 of the Court’s Individual Rules of Practice in Civil Cases. Specifically, NEBC seeks to file under seal the following exhibit: Exhibit 1: Document produced by NEBC with Bates number NEBC0019286, which NEBC has designated “Confidential.” Exhibit 1 includes material that has been designated “Confidential” under the Protective Order. The Protective Order permits the parties to designate certain categories of sensitive information produced in the course of discovery as “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential,” with all such material referred to collectively as “Protected Material.” Protective Order § IV. The Protective Order requires that “[a] Party or Non-Party submitting any Protected Material to the Court in the Related Actions (whether in support of a pleading or motion, at a hearing, or in connection with any other pre-trial proceeding) must file the Protected Material in redacted form or under seal to the full extent permitted by the Local Rules of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and Judge Failla’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases.” Jd. § [X.A. The weight of the presumption that documents will be publicly filed is “not particularly great” where, as here, “[t]he documents are not to be submitted in connection with a dispositive motion, but merely a motion to compel further discovery from a party.” Alexander Interactive, Inc. v. Adorama, Inc., 2014 WL 4346174, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 2014). In addition, Exhibit 1 is a document that NEBC has produced and designated “Confidential” because it contains sensitive, non-public information regarding NEBC’s organization and operation. Cf City of Almaty, Kazakhstan v. Ablyazov, 2021 WL 1177737, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2021) (granting motion to seal documents relating to company’s “internal strategic discussions”).

Accordingly, NEBC requests leave to file Exhibit 1 under seal.

Very truly yours,

Sean W. Gallagher Counsel for Plaintiff Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association National Employee Benefits Committee

cc: Counsel of record on ECF

Application GRANTED. The above-specified exhibit associated with Plaintiff's submission shall be permitted to be filed under seal, viewable only to the parties and the Court. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 137. Date: January 4, 2022 SO ORDERED. New York, New York

HON. KATHERINE POLK FAILLA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Blue Cross Blue Shield Association National Employee Benefits Committee v. Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blue-cross-blue-shield-association-national-employee-benefits-committee-v-nysd-2022.