Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 18, 2024

Emergency Physician Services of New York v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc.

Judge
John Koeltl
Docket
1:20-cv-09183
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Emergency Physician Services v. UnitedHealth Group, Judge Koeltl granted defendants’ request to seal and redact commercially sensitive information.

Who this affects

The defendants and TeamHealth plaintiffs, whose confidential business, financial, claims, billing, cost, and reimbursement information may be kept from public disclosure.

What happened

Emergency Physician Services of New York v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc. concerns defendants’ request to restrict public access to certain materials filed in the case.

Defendants asked to seal an exhibit and redact limited metrics and financial information from their opposition to the plaintiffs’ request to voluntarily dismiss the case and from a supporting declaration. The information included billed charges, allowed amounts, reimbursement data, and average costs.

The court granted the application because disclosure could cause competitive harm to the parties. Judge John G. Koeltl therefore allowed the exhibit to be sealed and the specified information to be redacted.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Emergency Physician Services of New York v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-09183
Judge
John Koeltl
Date
Nov. 18, 2024

Background

The defendants asked the court for permission to seal Exhibit 1 to the declaration of Gregory Jacob and to redact limited information in their opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice and in the supporting declaration of Bruce Deal. The request relied on the confidentiality stipulation and protective order in the case.

Requested Restrictions

The materials contained information identified as confidential under the protective order, including information used in an expert report. The information concerned the plaintiffs’ total billed charges for disputed claims, defendants’ total allowed amounts, calculations based on billed charges and Medicare percentages, average charges and allowed amounts per claim, the plaintiffs’ average cost of providing emergency-department care, and average reimbursement payments received per emergency-department visit from various payors, including defendants.

The request stated that disclosure could harm both sides’ bargaining positions in negotiations over payment rates. It also stated that other commercial insurance payors, provider groups, and hospital groups could use the information in negotiations, creating a competitive disadvantage.

Legal Standard and Ruling

The court explained that documents relevant to judicial proceedings generally carry a presumption of public access, but that presumption must be balanced against competing considerations, including privacy interests and the likely injury from disclosure. It concluded that highly sensitive business and financial information, and information whose disclosure could cause competitive harm, can justify sealing or redaction.

The court granted the application. It allowed Exhibit 1 to the Jacob Declaration to be filed under seal and permitted the limited confidential metrics and information in the opposition and Deal Declaration to be redacted. The text provided does not address the merits of the underlying dispute or the plaintiffs’ request for voluntary dismissal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.