Emergency Physician Services of New York v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc.
- John Koeltl
- 1:20-cv-09183
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Emergency Physician Services v. UnitedHealth Group, Judge Koeltl granted defendants’ application to seal sensitive business, financial, agreement, and health-data material.
The order affects the defendants’ summary-judgment filings and exhibits, the plaintiffs whose business and claims information appears in those materials, defendants’ confidential business information, non-party Equity Healthcare and other agreement signatories, and individuals whose personally identifiable information is included.
What happened
Emergency Physician Services of New York v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc. involved defendants’ request to file limited portions of their summary-judgment reply papers and supporting exhibits under seal. The materials included information designated confidential under the parties’ protective order.
The requested material concerned reimbursement rates, business strategies, contracts and negotiations, expert-report data, market information, and health-benefit claims data. The court accepted that disclosure could cause competitive harm and that some personally identifiable information was protected by federal health-privacy law.
Judge John G. Koeltl granted the application, allowing the specified portions of the filings and exhibits to be filed under seal or redacted.
The detailed version
- Emergency Physician Services of New York v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-09183
- John Koeltl
- Dec. 1, 2023
Background
Defendants UnitedHealth Group, Inc., United HealthCare Services, Inc., UMR, Inc., UnitedHealthcare Service LLC, UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company, and Oxford Health Plans LLC asked the court for permission to file under seal limited portions of their reply memorandum supporting summary judgment, their reply and response to the parties’ statements of undisputed facts, and certain exhibits to Gregory Jacob’s declaration. The request was made under the parties’ confidentiality stipulation and protective order.
Reasons for Sealing
The court explained that judicial records are generally presumed to be publicly accessible, but that presumption must be balanced against competing interests, including privacy concerns and the potential harm from disclosure. The materials identified in the application included:
- Plaintiffs’ financial information, reimbursement data, internal business processes, and negotiation strategies; - Defendants’ reimbursement data, health-plan and fee strategies, negotiation positions, and confidential information concerning their relationship with non-party Equity Healthcare; - Confidential agreements involving parties and non-parties, including agreements concerning healthcare services, insurance plans, and facility relationships; - Commercially sensitive information used in expert reports, including billed charges, allowed amounts, and calculations based on Medicare percentages and average charges; - Sensitive claims data, market data, non-public charge benchmarks, and personally identifiable information protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and its regulations.
The court found that disclosure of the commercial information could put plaintiffs, defendants, and some non-parties at a competitive disadvantage. It also recognized the privacy protection applicable to personally identifiable information.
Ruling
Judge John G. Koeltl granted defendants’ application. The ruling permitted defendants to file the specified limited portions of their reply papers and statements of undisputed facts, along with the identified exhibits to the Jacob declaration, under seal or with redactions. The opinion addressed access to and protection of filing materials; it did not decide the parties’ underlying summary-judgment dispute.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.