Ramey v. Molina Healthcare Inc

HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 11 LAUREN E. RAMEY, individually and on CASE NO. 3:23-cv-05768-RAJ behalf of all others similarly situated, 12 ORDER Plaintiff, v. MOLINA HEALTHCARE INC., Defendant.

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff Lauren E. Ramey (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Molina Healthcare Inc. (“Defendant”)’s Stipulated Motion to Seal Documents. Dkt. # 60.

This is a class action lawsuit pertaining to alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (“TCPA”). In June 2023, Plaintiff Lauren E.

Ramey (“Plaintiff”) received an unsolicited call from Defendant regarding enrollment in a health maintenance organization healthcare plan for her daughter. Dkt. # 1 at ¶¶ 20–21.

Plaintiff was under the impression she was conversing with her daughter’s actual insurer, Aetna, and therefore agreed to switch the healthcare plan. Id. at ¶ 21. After realizing that it was Defendant who was making these calls, Plaintiff indicated her desire to revert her daughter’s health insurance back to Aetna. Id. at ¶ 27. For the next several weeks, Plaintiff received numerous phone calls and generic voicemails from Defendant, which she labels as an “annoyance, nuisance, and invasion of privacy.” Id. at ¶ 40. Her complaint asserts a single cause of action on behalf of herself and eligible class members for violation of the TCPA. Id. at ¶¶ 49–52.

6 In support of her Reply to the pending Motion for Class Certification, Plaintiff seeks to file under seal portions of deposition transcripts and other materials designated as confidential. Dkt. # 60 at 2. Defendant does not oppose its request. Id. at 1.

9 In determining whether to seal judicial records, a court must conscientiously balance the competing interests of the public and the party who seeks to keep certain judicial records secret. Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006). A party seeking to seal a judicial record bears the burden of overcoming the strong presumption in favor of public access to records by meeting the compelling reasons standard. Id. at 1178.

15 Plaintiff provides that the excerpts of the deposition transcripts contain protected health information under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Dkt. # 60 at 2. Furthermore, Plaintiff states that public disclosure of the confidential information may cause competitive harm. Given that the Motion is unopposed and there is binding case law on the issue, the Court concurs with Plaintiff’s reasoning. See Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1979) (holding that preventing disclosure of “business information that might harm a litigant’s competitive standing” is a compelling reason to seal records). The Court also finds that the public interest in gaining access to sensitive medical information and certain business practices does not outweigh the private interest in keeping this information sealed. See Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179.

25 /// /// /// 1 Based on the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the Parties’ Stipulated Motion to Seal Documents. Dkt. # 60. The Court hereby ORDERS the sealing of the unredacted version of the Reply to Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification. Dkt. # 61.

5 Dated this 20th day of March, 2025.

A The Honorable Richard A. Jones United States District Judge