Sarruf v. Lilly Long Term Disability Plan

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: April 11, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-00461
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

8 DAVID SARRUF, 9 Plaintiff, Case No. 2:24-cv-00461-JCC 10 v. STIPULATED MOTION FOR 11 LEAVE TO FILE THE LILLY LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN & ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD 12 LILLY LIFE INSURANCE PLAN, UNDER SEAL AND [PROPOSED] 13 ORDER 14 Defendant. 15 16 I. Relied Requested. 17 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(d) and Local Civil Rule 5(g), Plaintiff 18 David Sarruf (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants The Eli Lilly and Company Long Term Disability 19 Plan (the “LTD Plan”)1 and The Eli Lilly and Company Life Insurance and Death Benefit Plan 20 (the “Life Insurance Plan”)2 (together, “Defendants”) (Plaintiff and Defendants together, the 21 “Parties”), by and through their attorneys, hereby respectfully move the Court for an order 22 permitting Defendants to file the Administrative Record under seal, without redaction. The 23 24 Parties seek leave to file the Administrative Record under seal in its entirety due to the extensive 25 26 1 The LTD Plan is incorrectly named in the Complaint as the Lilly Long Term Disability Plan. 27 2 The Life Insurance Plan is incorrectly named in the Complaint as the Lilly Life Insurance Plan. presence of Plaintiff’s sensitive personal medical information throughout the Administrative 1 2 Record. The Parties agree that redaction is not a practical or effective alternative due to the 3 nature and volume of the confidential material. 4 II. Relevant Facts and Legal Authority. 5 This action arises under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 6 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., and involves a claim for long-term disability benefits. The 7 Administrative Record pertaining to Plaintiff’s claim is over 3,000 pages long and contains 8 mainly Plaintiff’s medical records and documents discussing Plaintiff’s medical information. 9 10 Although there is a general presumption of public access to court records, courts in this 11 District have recognized that the need to protect medical privacy constitutes a “compelling 12 reason” sufficient to justify sealing records. See, e.g., Karpenski v. Am. Gen. Life Cos., LLC, 13 No. 2:12-CV-01569-RSM, 2013 WL 5588312, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 9, 2013) (granting 14 motion to seal ERISA administrative record due to medical privacy concerns); S.L. by & through 15 J.L. v. Cross, 675 F. Supp. 3d 1138, 1146–47 (W.D. Wash. 2023) (same). 16 As certified below, the Parties have conferred and agree that redaction is not a viable 17 18 alternative due to the density and volume of Plaintiff’s sensitive personal medical information 19 throughout the Administrative Record. Therefore, sealing the Administrative Record is the least 20 restrictive means of protecting Plaintiff’s privacy while complying with the Court’s filing 21 procedures.3 22 23

24 3 The Administrative Record consists of the claim and appeal file as maintained by the LTD Plan in the ordinary course of business. A small number of documents in the Administrative Record appear with 25 redactions because they were produced in that form to Plaintiff’s counsel in the course of the pre- litigation administrative review process. (See, e.g., LILLY 3109, 3111, 3112, 3114). These minor 26 redactions—such as Plaintiff’s address, telephone number, and e-mail address—do not affect the substantive content of the Administrative Record. Accordingly, the Parties respectfully request that the 27 Court accept the Administrative Record as filed, with the minor redactions, for in camera review. III. Certification Pursuant to LCR 5(g)(3)(A). 1 The undersigned counsel for the Parties, Kara P. Wheatley and Glenn R. Kantor, 2 3 conferred via e-mail on April 8 and April 10, 2025, regarding the need to file the Administrative 4 Record under seal. The Parties agree that sealing is appropriate and necessary to protect 5 Plaintiff’s confidential medical information contained therein. 6 IV. Conclusion. 7 For the foregoing reasons, the Parties jointly ask the Court to grant this stipulated motion 8 to file the Administrative Record under seal. 9 Date: April 11, 2025 10 11 Respectfully submitted, 12 DAVID SARRUF THE ELI LILLY AND COMPANY LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN AND THE ELI 13 By: Glenn R. Kant or (w/ permission) LILLY AND COMPANY LIFE INSURANCE 14 Stacy Monahan Tucker AND DEATH BENEFIT PLAN MONAHAN TUCKER LAW 15 14241 Woodinville-Duvall Rd. By: /s/ Douglas F. Stewart Woodinville, WA 98072 Douglas F. Stewart (#34068) 16 Tel: 844-503-5301 Bracewell, LLP Fax: 206-800-7801 701 Fifth Ave, Suite 6850 17 Email: smtucker@mtlawpc.com Seattle, WA 98104 18 Telephone: 206-204-6200 Glenn R. Kantor (admitted pro hac vice) Fax: 800-404-3970 19 Brent Dorian Brehm (admitted pro hac vice) doug.stewart@bracewell.com KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 20 9301 Corbin Ave. Mark C. Nielson (admitted pro hac vice) Ste. 1400 Kara P. Wheatley (admitted pro hac vice) 21 Northridge, CA 91324 GROOM LAW GROUP 22 Tel: 818-886-2525 1701 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 1200 Fax: 818-350-6272 Washington, DC 20006 23 Email: bbrehm@kantorlaw.net kwheatley@groom.com mcn@groom.com 24 Attorneys for Plaintiff Telephone: 202-8861-6339 25 Facsimile: 202-659-4503

26 Attorneys for Defendants

27 [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 2 THIS MATTER having come before the Court upon the Parties’ STIPULATED 3 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD UNDER SEAL, and 4 the Court having considered the motion and all relevant materials, and finding good cause 5 shown, hereby ODERS: 6 1. The Parties’ Stipulated Motion for Leave to File the Administrative Record Under 7 Seal is GRANTED. 8 2. Defendants are authorized to file the Administrative Record under seal in its 9 10 entirety, without redaction. 11 3. The Administrative Record shall remain under seal unless otherwise ordered by 12 the Court. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED this 11th day of April 2025. 14

15 A

16 _______________________________________ 17 THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 18

19 20 21 22 23

27 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1

2 I hereby certify that on the 11th day of April, 2025, I electronically filed the foregoing 3 with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing 4 to all counsel of record who receive CM/ECF notifications. 5 Dated: April 11, 2025 6 7 By: /s/ Douglas F. Stewart Douglas F. Stewart, WSBA No. 34068 8

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27