United States of America v. LABQ Clinical Diagnostics, LLC
- Lewis Liman
- 1:22-cv-00751
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In United States of America v. LABQ Clinical Diagnostics, Judge Liman granted a motion to seal documents and approved redactions protecting patient and third-party information.
The ruling affects the defendants, the patients whose information appears in the records, and third parties whose identities or contact information appear in the publicly filed documents.
What happened
In United States of America v. LABQ Clinical Diagnostics, the defendants asked to redact patient information and the identities and contact information of third parties from publicly filed documents.
The court granted the joint motion to seal at Docket No. 181, approved the redactions, and allowed the referenced unredacted documents to remain sealed.
Judge Lewis J. Liman said the privacy interests of patients and innocent third parties outweighed the applicable presumption of public access, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the motion.
The detailed version
- United States of America v. LABQ Clinical Diagnostics, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-00751
- Lewis Liman
- Oct. 3, 2024
Background
The defendants sought to redact patient information and the identities and contact information of third parties from documents filed publicly in the two related actions.
Court’s analysis
The court treated the records as judicial documents, meaning documents submitted to a court that can be subject to public-access rules. It stated that the presumption of public access was not as strong as it would have been for documents filed with a motion for summary judgment, a motion to dismiss, or a motion to confirm or vacate an arbitration award. The court also identified strong countervailing interests in protecting patient information and the privacy interests of innocent third parties.
Ruling
The court granted the joint motion to seal at Docket No. 181, approved the redactions, and ruled that the referenced unredacted documents may remain under seal. Judge Lewis J. Liman directed the Clerk of Court to close the motion.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.