National Credit Union Administration Board v. U.S. Bank National Association
- Louis Stanton
- 1:18-cv-11366
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In National Credit Union Administration Board v. U.S. Bank National Association, Judge Stanton received NCUA’s request to redact borrower information; the filing shows no ruling.
The filing concerns NCUA, U.S. Bank National Association, the public’s access to court records, and nonparty borrowers and other individuals whose personal information appears in the exhibits.
What happened
National Credit Union Administration Board v. U.S. Bank National Association concerns the National Credit Union Administration Board’s request to protect private information in documents filed with its partial-summary-judgment motion. The document is a letter from NCUA’s counsel, not a court decision.
NCUA withdrew its request to seal most exhibits but renewed its request to file four exhibits with redactions. It said those exhibits contained borrowers’ names, addresses, workplaces, loan numbers, and, sometimes, relatives’ and business associates’ names. NCUA argued that this information was private, concerned people who were not parties, and should be redacted.
The document does not state that the court granted or denied the request. Judge Stanton is identified as the judge, but the text provided contains no ruling on the sealing request.
The detailed version
- National Credit Union Administration Board v. U.S. Bank National Association · No. 1:18-cv-11366
- Louis Stanton
- Apr. 13, 2023
Document and posture
The provided document is an April 12, 2023 letter from counsel for the National Credit Union Administration Board, acting as liquidating agent for certain corporate credit unions. The letter responds to the court’s March 29, 2023 order concerning NCUA’s request to seal exhibits submitted in connection with summary-judgment motions. The provided text does not include a ruling on the renewed request.
Withdrawal of most sealing requests
NCUA stated that it would no longer seek to seal several previously sealed exhibits. These included Exhibits 100, 110, 120, and 123 to a declaration supporting NCUA’s motion for partial summary judgment, and Exhibits 198, 292, 318, 319, 320, 323, and 327 through 346 to a declaration supporting NCUA’s opposition to U.S. Bank’s motion for summary judgment. NCUA said it would file supplemental declarations containing those exhibits.
Renewed request for four exhibits
NCUA renewed its request to file Exhibits 96, 98, 101, and 104 in partially redacted form. It proposed removing nonpublic personal information and filing unredacted versions under seal, with the proposed redactions highlighted in red.
The letter described the four exhibits as forensic-review spreadsheets containing detailed findings about alleged breaches of representations and warranties. According to NCUA, the spreadsheets included borrowers’ names, personal addresses, places of employment, loan numbers, and sometimes the names of borrowers’ relatives and business associates.
Legal basis stated in the filing
The letter cited the presumption of public access to court documents and the court’s discretion to seal documents when privacy interests outweigh public access. It also cited the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which generally restricts financial institutions from disclosing nonpublic personal information to nonaffiliated third parties. NCUA argued that the information was not relevant to the parties’ legal dispute, implicated legitimate privacy interests, concerned nonparties, and could cause clear harm if publicly released.
Relief requested and disposition
NCUA asked the court to grant its request to redact the nonpublic personal borrower information from the four exhibits. The provided document does not state whether Judge Louis Stanton granted, denied, or otherwise decided that request. Because the text is a party filing rather than a court ruling, no disposition of the motion can be identified from the provided material.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.