Pacific Life Insurance Company v. The Bank of New York Mellon
- Katherine Failla
- 1:17-cv-01388
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Pacific Life v. Bank of New York Mellon, Judge Lehrburger denied BNYM’s request to keep six exhibits and related filings sealed.
The Bank of New York Mellon’s request to keep specified exhibits and related portions of its filings sealed was denied.
What happened
Pacific Life Insurance Company v. The Bank of New York Mellon concerned The Bank of New York Mellon’s request to keep certain materials sealed while seeking summary judgment.
The Bank of New York Mellon asked the court to maintain sealing over six exhibits and related portions of its summary-judgment memorandum and statement of facts. It cited sensitive business information, third parties’ private financial information, and financial-account information.
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger denied the sealing application. He said the excerpts did not meet the strict standards for sealing information in the Second Circuit.
The detailed version
- Pacific Life Insurance Company v. The Bank of New York Mellon · No. 1:17-cv-01388
- Katherine Failla
- June 18, 2021
Background
The Bank of New York Mellon (BNYM) asked the court to keep six exhibits under seal. The exhibits had been filed provisionally under seal in connection with BNYM’s motion for summary judgment. BNYM also sought redactions to related portions of its supporting memorandum and its statement of undisputed material facts.
BNYM argued that some deposition excerpts contained sensitive information about its internal procedures and specific projects. It also argued that another exhibit contained confidential, nonpublic personal information belonging to third parties, including financial-account information. BNYM separately relied on the federal rule concerning the protection of certain financial-account information.
Legal standard and ruling
The court considered the standards governing access to court records in the Second Circuit, including whether the materials were judicial documents, the strength of the presumption of public access, and competing interests that might overcome that presumption. BNYM argued that the documents were not judicial documents because they had played no role in the court’s decision-making functions and had been exchanged during discovery.
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger denied the application to maintain the materials under seal. The order states that the court reviewed the excerpts and that they did not satisfy the strict standards for sealing information imposed in the Second Circuit. The order did not separately describe the treatment of each exhibit or each requested redaction.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.