Chen v. Vilsack

Background

The plaintiffs asked for permission to file Exhibit BB to their summary-judgment motion under seal. The exhibit consists of records supplied by the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance from its Specialized Fraud and Abuse Reporting System. The records contain electronic benefit transfer information concerning the plaintiffs’ Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, including card numbers, public-assistance amounts, retailer names and addresses, purchase amounts, account balances, and transaction dates and times. The defendants agreed that the records were confidential and consented to the request.

The plaintiffs argued that federal and New York laws restrict disclosure of information about Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program households and retailers. They also argued that sealing was necessary to protect personal and financial privacy. The plaintiffs requested that the records be sealed in their entirety because personal and financial information was intermingled with other information, and redaction would leave only headings and system codes. They additionally stated that disclosure of S.O.’s shopping patterns and retailer addresses could endanger S.O., who is a survivor of domestic abuse and lives in a domestic-violence shelter.

Court’s Analysis

The court concluded that Exhibit BB was a “judicial document,” meaning a court filing to which the common-law presumption of public access applies. The court determined, however, that the presumption was not especially strong. Based on the plaintiffs’ moving papers, Exhibit BB supported assertions that certain Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits had been stolen. Although reviewing those allegations was necessary to address the plaintiffs’ claim that the defendants acted arbitrarily, capriciously, or otherwise unlawfully by failing to replace the allegedly stolen benefits, the evidence of theft was not central to the court’s adjudication of the plaintiffs’ Administrative Procedure Act claim.

The court held that the statutory restrictions on disclosure and the plaintiffs’ privacy interests outweighed the presumption of public access. It therefore granted the application to seal Exhibit BB. This order resolved the sealing request and did not resolve the underlying Administrative Procedure Act claim.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni ordered that Exhibit BB be filed under seal. The opinion does not state a ruling on the plaintiffs’ summary-judgment motion or on the merits of their claim concerning replacement of allegedly stolen benefits.