PERMENTER v. ECLINICAL WORKS LLC

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. ) ALEX PERMENTER, ) ERIC RODIGHIERO, and ) CHRIS WHEELER, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:18-cv-382 (MTT) ) eCLINICALWORKS, LLC, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________ ) ORDER The Court entered today its order granting in part and denying in part Defendant eClinicalWorks, LLC’s (“eCW”) motion for summary judgment. The unredacted order has been filed temporarily restricted to court users and case participants. On the public docket, the Court has redacted portions of the order discussing alleged vulnerabilities in eCW’s software, the disclosure of which could arguably jeopardize confidential patient information. Only arguably because at this point, years after relevant events, it seems unlikely that disclosure is a credible risk.1 Nonetheless, the Court will allow the parties 14 days to address whether redactions are necessary. Absent sufficient cause, redactions shall be removed and a revised order will be filed on the public docket. The Court reminds the parties that Federal courts are public institutions and cannot retain the confidence of the people if they operate under a cloak of secrecy. Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 571 (1980) (“The crucial prophylactic

1 The Court notes that some of this information has already been discussed and/or made known through various unredacted filings already on the public docket. aspects of the administration of justice cannot function in the dark.”); Chi.Tribune Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1311 (11th Cir. 2001) (“The common-law right of access to judicial proceedings, an essential component of our system of justice, is instrumental in securing the integrity of the process.”).

SO ORDERED, this 25th day of June, 2025. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT