Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 15, 2023

Popovchak v. UnitedHealth Group Incorporated

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:22-cv-10756
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Popovchak v. UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, Judge Caproni granted permission for redacted medical exhibits to remain redacted in the plaintiffs’ opposition to dismissal.

Who this affects

The ruling affects the plaintiffs, especially Alexandra Popovchak, by allowing personal and medical information in Exhibits 4 and 5 to remain redacted from the public filing; it also limits public access to that information.

What happened

In Popovchak v. UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, the plaintiffs asked to redact two exhibits filed with their opposition to the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The exhibits were letters about Alexandra Popovchak’s insurance appeals.

The plaintiffs said the letters contained her home address, insurance identification and group numbers, and information about medical services. The defendants consented to the request.

Judge Valerie E. Caproni granted the application and allowed Exhibits 4 and 5 to remain redacted. This order addressed the exhibits’ public filing, not the motion to dismiss.

The detailed version

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

Case
Popovchak v. UnitedHealth Group Incorporated · No. 1:22-cv-10756
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
June 15, 2023

Background

The plaintiffs requested permission to redact Exhibits 4 and 5 supporting their opposition to the defendants’ motion to dismiss. Exhibit 4 was a December 4, 2021 letter from UnitedHealthcare denying Alexandra Popovchak’s first-level appeal concerning coverage of services at issue in the amended complaint. Exhibit 5 was a March 28, 2022 letter denying her second-level appeal.

Request and Reasons

The plaintiffs said both letters contained Popovchak’s home address, insurance group number, insurance identification number, and a transaction number for medical services. They argued that this personally identifying and health-related information was private, that the proposed redactions were limited, and that the redacted information did not meaningfully reveal the substance of the case or the basis for a court decision. UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, United Healthcare Insurance Company, United Healthcare Services, Inc., and United Healthcare Service LLC consented to the request.

Ruling

The court granted the application. Exhibits 4 and 5 may remain redacted. Judge Valerie E. Caproni’s order addressed the filing of these exhibits and did not decide the defendants’ motion to dismiss.

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.