Mercer Health & Benefits LLC v. Brown

Background

Counsel for the defendants, with counsel for Mercer Health & Benefits LLC’s consent, asked the court to allow the parties to file a copy of their Confidential Settlement and Release Agreement partially under seal. The request concerned a version of the agreement containing redactions.

The letter stated that the parties sought to keep confidential information including client names and financial information in exhibits, the trailing 12 months’ revenue for certain health and welfare benefits business, the nature and amount of the settlement consideration, specified triggers and carve-outs, and Mercer’s bank-account information. The letter also stated that the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction during the term of a proposed Stipulated Permanent Injunction and had included related language in a proposed Stipulated Order of Dismissal with Prejudice and proposed injunction.

Parties’ Arguments

The parties argued that the proposed redactions were narrowly tailored to protect confidential settlement terms, commercially sensitive client and revenue information, and bank-account information. They cited decisions concerning the confidentiality of settlement agreements and stated that the information had been intended to remain confidential when the agreement was negotiated and signed.

These points appear in the parties’ request. The available text does not include a separate merits analysis by the court explaining which particular redactions it approved.

Ruling

The court’s endorsement states: “The Application is granted.” Accordingly, the application to file the settlement agreement partially under seal was granted. The available text does not separately list the approved redactions or state whether the court entered the proposed dismissal order, permanent injunction, or retention-of-jurisdiction provision. Judge Paul G. Gardephe issued the ruling.