Filed: Jan. 17, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 17, 2020
Summary: ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO MAINTAIN CONFIDENTIAL PROPRIETARY MATERIAL UNDER SEAL ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN , District Judge . This Order addresses the sealed joint discovery dispute letter dated January 7, 2020, see ECF No. 99, which was filed in redacted form, and certain of the attached exhibits, which were filed in redacted form or entirely under seal. The Court heard and resolved the Parties' discovery dispute at a hearing on January 10, 2020. See Unnumbered Docket Entry Dated Jan. 10, 20
Summary: ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO MAINTAIN CONFIDENTIAL PROPRIETARY MATERIAL UNDER SEAL ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN , District Judge . This Order addresses the sealed joint discovery dispute letter dated January 7, 2020, see ECF No. 99, which was filed in redacted form, and certain of the attached exhibits, which were filed in redacted form or entirely under seal. The Court heard and resolved the Parties' discovery dispute at a hearing on January 10, 2020. See Unnumbered Docket Entry Dated Jan. 10, 202..
More
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO MAINTAIN CONFIDENTIAL PROPRIETARY MATERIAL UNDER SEAL
ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN, District Judge.
This Order addresses the sealed joint discovery dispute letter dated January 7, 2020, see ECF No. 99, which was filed in redacted form, and certain of the attached exhibits, which were filed in redacted form or entirely under seal. The Court heard and resolved the Parties' discovery dispute at a hearing on January 10, 2020. See Unnumbered Docket Entry Dated Jan. 10, 2020. The material that John Hancock seeks to maintain under seal was not mentioned during the hearing, and it was not relevant to the Court's resolution of the dispute. Accordingly, it is not subject to a presumption of public access. See In re Sept. 11 Litig., 723 F.Supp.2d 526, 533 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (stating that documents that "d[o] not bear on [the Court's] adjudication of [a] motion" are "not the type of document[s] to which the public has ... access") (Hellerstein, J.).
Insofar as that material was relevant to the Parties' dispute, because it was filed in connection with a discovery motion, it is subject (if at all) to a weak presumption of public access. See Brown v. Maxwell, 929 F.3d 41, 50 (2d Cir. 2019). That weak presumption is outweighed here by John Hancock's interest in maintaining the confidentiality of certain non-public, commercially sensitive, and proprietary information the disclosure of which would cause John Hancock significant competitive harm. See GoSMiLE. Inc. v. Dr. Jonathan Levine, D.M.D. P.C., 769 F.Supp.2d 630, 649-50 (S.D.N.Y. 2011); see also, e.g., Order, In re AXA Equitable Life Ins. Co., No. 1:16-cv-00740-JMF (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 23, 2017), ECF No. 315 (granting motion to seal document containing life insurance company's financial projections and planned accounting treatment of certain products); Memorandum Opinion and Order, In re AXA Equitable Life Ins. Co., No. 1:16-cv-00740-JMF (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 3, 2017), ECF No. 135 at 4 (granting motion to seal documents disclosing "proprietary actuarial assumptions, processes, methodologies, and judgements that continue to inform or reflect [the life insurance company's] current mortality assumptions.").
More specifically, the documents contain the following types of non-public, commercially sensitive, and proprietary information:
Exhibit to Non-Public, Commercially Sensitive, and Treatment
January 7, Proprietary Information
2020 Joint
Discovery
Letter
1 This memorandum describes John Hancock's Withhold in Full
methodology for undertaking the cost-of-insurance
charge redetermination at issue in this case. It discusses
actuarial assumptions that John Hancock used to price
the relevant life insurance policies, the development of
actuarial assumptions used to implement the
redetermination, and the redetermination's potential
financial impact.
2 The redacted portion refers to third-party mortality Redact
studies that John Hancock consulted when developing
certain proprietary mortality assumptions, and the use of
which John Hancock represents it is obliged to maintain
in confidence.
3 The redacted portions refer to the third-party mortality Redact
studies described in Exhibit 2, the use of which John
Hancock represents it is obliged to maintain in
confidence.
5 The redacted portion of the internal draft Q&A discusses Redact
various aspects of John Hancock's business and business
strategy, including actuarial assumption development,
financial performance, and contemplated initiatives.
9 The redacted portion contains sensitive information Redact
concerning the impact of the cost-of-insurance rate
redetermination on certain policies.
10 The redacted portions describe updated proprietary Redact
mortality assumptions used to price various John
Hancock products, the process for developing those
assumptions, and the experience used to do so, which is
among the most sensitive information that John Hancock
possesses.
11 The redacted portion describes the process by which Redact
John Hancock developed new proprietary lapse
assumptions.
12 The redacted portions describe actuarial assumptions Redact
that John Hancock developed and/or implemented in
relation to the cost-of-insurance charge redetermination
at issue in this action.
14 This memorandum was prepared for the purpose of Withhold in Full
evaluating a contemplated (but ultimately
unconsummated) transaction that John Hancock
represents it is obliged to keep confidential. The
disclosure of this contemplated transaction and
information concerning the transaction could cause John
Hancock significant competitive harm.
15 This document describes the contemplated (but Withhold in Full
ultimately unconsummated) transaction discussed in
Exhibit 14.
16 This presentation was prepared for the purpose of Withhold in Full
evaluating the contemplated (but ultimately
unconsummated) transaction discussed in Exhibit 14.
17 This presentation was prepared for the purpose of Withhold in Full
evaluating the contemplated (but ultimately
unconsummated) transaction discussed in Exhibit 14.
19 The redacted portions reveal mortality experience that Redact
John Hancock used to develop proprietary mortality
assumptions.
21 This presentation describes the status of more than 70 Withhold in Full
strategic initiatives that John Hancock contemplated or
undertook.
John Hancock's request to maintain the subject material under seal is narrowly tailored. See Sellick v. Consol. Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc., 2017 WL 1133443, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 23, 2017). The redactions John Hancock has proposed to the January 7, 2020 joint discovery letter and Exhibits 2-3, 5, 9-12, and 19 thereto are limited to information that meets the criteria for sealing. And Exhibits 1, 14-17, and 21 to the joint discovery letter consist almost entirely (if not entirely) of non-public, commercially sensitive, and proprietary information, such that redacting those Exhibits would be impractical.
For these reasons, the motion of Defendants John Hancock Life Insurance Company of New York and John Hancock Life Insurance Company (U.S.A.) to maintain under seal the materials described above is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
