Rogers v. Minnesota Life Insurance Company

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA OCALA DIVISION

DIANE T. ROGERS,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 5:21-cv-164-CEM-PRL

MINNESOTA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, FINANCIAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION and REGIONS BANK,

Defendants.

ORDER This case is before the Court for consideration of Defendants’ unopposed motion to file documents under seal. (Doc. 72). Defendants recite that confidential documents were inadvertently filed as exhibits to Plaintiff’s reply brief in support of her motion to compel, and that those documents and the brief itself are within the scope of the parties’ confidentially agreement and also constitute confidential, proprietary, and sensitive industry information. (Doc. 72). Plaintiff does not oppose the motion to seal. The right of access to judicial records pursuant to common law is well established. See Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978). Thus, when parties request an order restricting access to pleadings and evidence filed with the court, such a request warrants heightened scrutiny. Indeed, when a request for filing under seal is made, Eleventh Circuit precedent setting forth the governing standard and the public's interests, as well as the requirements of the Local Rules, should be addressed. See U.S. v. Rosenthal, 763 F.2d 1291, 1293 (11th Cir. 1985); Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978); Chicago Tribune Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1311-12 (11th Cir. 2001); Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court for Norfolk County, 457 U.S. 596, 606-07 (1982); Microlumen, Inc. v. Allegrati, Case No. 8:07-cv-350-T-17TBM, 2007 WL 1247068 (M.D. Fla. April 30, 2007). Upon a finding that the requirements of Local Rule 1.11 are satisfied, the unopposed motion to file documents under seal (Doc. 72) is GRANTED. In the interests of efficiency, the Clerk is directed to take all steps necessary to strike Plaintiff's reply and exhibits (Docs. 71, 71-1, 71-2 & 71-3) and to re-file them under seal. The documents shall remain sealed during the pendency of this action, including on appeal, if applicable, and the duration of the seal shall be governed by Local Rule 1.11. The parties are reminded that requests to seal documents warrant heightened scrutiny, and that they should make every effort to minimize such requests. DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on June 9, 2022.

SL ercsn PHILIP R. LAMMENS United States Magistrate Judge Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties

-2-