Court filing
MOTION to File Documents Under Seal — Bofa Ca Unemployment (Dkt. 539)
Summary
Bank of America, N.A.'s motion to file documents under seal with its reply in support of its motion to stay pending resolution of its Rule 23(f) petition, in In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation, Case No. 21-MD-02992-GPC-MSB, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, filed 08/08/25 as Document 539 (7 pages). The bank seeks to seal portions of the reply and Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Valerie Haggans, which is its reply in support of the Rule 23(f) petition. It says every portion it seeks to seal references documents the court already sealed, covering its fraud detection and prevention policies, claims review strategies and implementation of the remediation plans. It argues disclosure risks competitive harm or could enable future fraud.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“MOTION to File Documents Under Seal — Bofa Ca Unemployment (Dkt. 539).”
Original at ecf.casd.uscourts.gov, No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB, Doc. 539. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/full-docket-bofa-ca-unemployment-casd-709615/2025-08-08-gov-uscourts-casd-709615-539-0-gov-uscourts-casd-709615-539-0/
, SHA-256 ce5a0859d2e40852a34ac6983d4e50b4e39b34ee69d636887a5963049357ead2.Full text
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 539 Filed 08/08/25 PageID.30164 Page
1 of 7
1 JAMES W. MCGARRY (pro hac vice)
JMcGarry@goodwinlaw.com
2 GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
100 Northern Avenue
3 Boston, MA 02210
Tel.: +1 617 570 1000
4 Fax: +1 617 523 1231
5 SABRINA M. ROSE-SMITH (pro hac vice)
SRoseSmith@goodwinlaw.com
6 MATTHEW L. RIFFEE (pro hac vice)
MRiffee@goodwinlaw.com
7 GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
1900 N Street, NW
8 Washington, DC 20036
Tel.: +1 202 346 4000
9 Fax: +1 202 346 4444
10 Attorneys for Defendant
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
11
12 [ADDITIONAL COUNSEL LISTED IN SIGNATURE BLOCK]
13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15 SAN DIEGO DIVISION
16 IN RE: BANK OF AMERICA Case No. 21-MD-02992-GPC-MSB
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT
17 BENEFITS LITIGATION DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO
18
FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER
SEAL IN ITS REPLY IN
19 SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO
STAY PENDING RESOLUTION
20 OF RULE 23(f) PETITION
21
22
Ctrm: 2D – 2nd Floor
23 Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel
24
25
26
27
28
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SEAL CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-GPC-MSB
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 539 Filed 08/08/25 PageID.30165 Page
2 of 7
1 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 79.2(c),
2 Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“Defendant” or “BANA”) hereby submits this
3 Motion to File Documents Under Seal (the “Motion”) in connection with Defendant’s
4 Reply in Support of its Motion to Stay Pending Resolution of Rule 23(f) Petition
5 (“Reply”). In particular, BANA seeks to seal portions of the Reply and Exhibit 1 of
6 the Declaration of Valerie Haggans (“Haggans Decl.”), which is Defendant’s Reply
7 in Support of its Rule 23(f) Petition, because good cause and compelling reasons
8 support the sealing of the identified document. All portions of the Reply and Exhibit
9 1 of the Haggans Decl. that BANA seeks to seal reference documents already found
10 to warrant sealing by this Court.1 See ECF 365, 381, 390, 391, 498, and 516 (the
11 “Sealing Orders”).
12 As previously stated in BANA’s motions to seal submitted in connection with
13 class certification briefing, argument, and the Court’s order (ECF 328, 344, 347,
14 495), the public’s right to inspect and copy judicial records is not absolute, and a
15 party faced with the disclosure of confidential or proprietary information may seek
16 to file the documents under seal to avoid disclosure of business information that
17 might result in competitive harm or be used for improper purposes. See Nixon v.
18 Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978) (denying disclosure); Local Civ.
19 R. 79.2(c). A party seeking to seal documents filed in connection with a discovery
20 dispute must show “good cause” to seal documents. Provide Com., Inc. v. Hartford
21 Fire Ins. Co., 2014 WL 1877438, at *2 (S.D. Cal. May 9, 2014) (applying the good
22 cause standard in granting motion to seal portions of motion to stay).
23 Courts consistently seal documents where—as here—disclosure of the
24 confidential business information risks competitive harm to the litigant or improper
25 use of the information such as to commit fraud. E.g., E.W. Bank v. Shanker, 2021
26 WL 3112452, at *18–19 (N.D. Cal. July 22, 2021) (finding compelling reasons to
27 1
BANA incorporates by reference its Motion to File Documents Under Seal (ECF
28
511) in connection with its Motion to Stay Pending Resolution of Rule 23(f)
Petition (ECF 513).
1
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SEAL CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-GPC-MSB
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 539 Filed 08/08/25 PageID.30166 Page
3 of 7
1 seal confidential onboarding processes, verification of customer identities, and fraud
2 prevention measures); Soria v. U.S. Bank N.A., 2019 WL 8167925, at *4 (C.D. Cal.
3 Apr. 25, 2019) (finding compelling reasons to seal internal fraud investigation
4 procedures because there was a “significant danger that someone could improperly
5 use this information to commit fraud and avoid detection.”). Indeed, this Court
6 largely granted the Parties’ prior motions to seal, finding good cause or compelling
7 reasons to seal documents concerning the same topics that BANA now seeks to seal,
8 including but not limited to, BANA’s fraud detection and prevention policies and
9 strategies; claims review policies and strategies and their implementation; analyses
10 of transactional fraud; analyses of claims fraud and potential strategies to combat that
11 fraud; and BANA’s implementation of the Remediation Plans. See ECF 365, 381,
12 390, 391, 498, and 516.
13 Consistent with this Court’s Sealing Orders, there is good cause to seal
14 portions of the Reply and Exhibit 1 filed therewith because they reflect topics that
15 are likely to cause particularized competitive harm to BANA and which could
16 potentially enable future fraud, and thus pose a danger to BANA’s business and the
17 public. See, e.g., EWB, 2021 WL 3112452, at *18–19 (finding compelling reasons
18 to seal where public disclosure of EWB’s confidential onboarding processes,
19 verification of customer identities and fraud prevention measures would “harm [the
20 bank’s] competitive standing”); Soria, 2019 WL 8167925, at *4 (finding compelling
21 reasons to seal bank’s internal procedures for investigating fraud because there was
22 a “significant danger that someone could improperly use this information to commit
23 fraud and avoid detection”). Each underlying document was also properly designated
24 as “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only” under the
25 Protective Order entered by this Court.
26 Specifically, the Confidential and Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only
27 documents and testimony that BANA relied upon in drafting Exhibit 1 of the
28 Haggans Decl. (Expert Class Certification Report of Greg J. Regan; Declaration of
2
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SEAL CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-GPC-MSB
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 539 Filed 08/08/25 PageID.30167 Page
4 of 7
1 William M. Martin; the Remediation Plans and Addenda; Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class
2 Certification; Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of Motion for Class Certification; and
3 District Court’s Order Granting Class Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification) were
4 previously sealed by this Court. See ECF 365, 381, 390, 391, 498, 516. The portions
5 of the Reply and Exhibit 1 that BANA seeks to seal now include references to and
6 discussions of the following categories of documents and information:
7 Portions of Exhibit 1 reflect confidential BANA fraud prevention
8 strategies and policies that could be misused by fraudsters to perpetrate
9 future fraud or could be used by another financial institution to BANA’s
10 competitive disadvantage. See Amended Sealing Order (ECF 365) at
11 5–6, 12; see also Cowan v. GE Cap. Retail Bank, 2015 WL 1324848, at
12 *2–3 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2015) (compelling reasons to seal bank’s
13 internal procedures for investigating fraud and addressing cardholder
14 fraud notifications);
15 Portions of the Reply and Exhibit 1 reflect confidential BANA analyses
16 pertaining to fraud on prepaid unemployment cards that similarly could
17 be misused by fraudsters to perpetrate future fraud or could be used by
18 another financial institution to BANA’s competitive disadvantage. See
19 Amended Sealing Order (ECF 365) at 5–9, 12; see also Cowan, 2015
20 WL 1324848, at *2–3 (compelling reasons to seal bank’s internal
21 procedures for investigating fraud and addressing cardholder fraud
22 notifications);
23 Portions of Exhibit 1 reflect BANA’s confidential analyses of its state
24 prepaid unemployment program operations, including but not limited to,
25 contractual negotiations, fraud volume, claims and call center
26 operations, and operational risks and losses. See Amended Sealing
27 Order (ECF 365) at 10–13, n. 14; see Brady v. Grendene USA, Inc., 2015
28 WL 6828400, at *3 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 6, 2015) (J. Curiel) (sealing
3
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SEAL CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-GPC-MSB
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 539 Filed 08/08/25 PageID.30168 Page
5 of 7
1 confidential business information that might harm the litigants’
2 competitive standing including profit and loss data and contractual
3 agreements);
4 Portions of the Reply and Exhibit 1 reflect confidential BANA
5 testimony pertaining to BANA’s Remediation Plans with the Office of
6 the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) and the Consumer Financial
7 Protection Bureau (“CFPB”)—which were designated Highly
8 Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only at those regulators’ requests—and
9 BANA’s implementation of the Plans, which this Court has found
10 compelling reasons to seal. Amended Sealing Order (ECF 365) at 14–
11 16; see also Erhart v. BofI Fed. Bank, 2019 WL 4534701, at *3 (S.D.
12 Cal. Sept. 19, 2019) (sealing information that the OCC asserted bank
13 examination privilege over but permitted to be produced subject to
14 confidentiality protections).
15 * * *
16 For the foregoing reasons and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s Sealing
17 Orders (ECF 365, 381, 390, 391, 498, 516), Plaintiffs’ Motions to Seal (ECF 376,
18 384, 394, 463), BANA’s prior Motions to Seal (ECF 328, 347, 376, 383, 495, 511)
19 and accompanying declarations submitted in support thereof (ECF 344-1, 344-2,
20 344-3, 347-1, 347-2), all of which are incorporated herein by reference, BANA
21 respectfully requests that the Court grant Defendant’s motion to seal portions of
22 Defendant’s Reply in Support of its Motion to Stay Pending Resolution of the Rule
23 23(f) Petition and Exhibit 1 filed therewith because good cause supports sealing
24 thereof.
25
Dated: August 8, 2025 Respectfully submitted,
26
By: s/ Valerie A. Haggans_____________
27
MATTHEW L. RIFFEE (pro hac vice)
28 MRiffee@goodwinlaw.com
4
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SEAL CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-GPC-MSB
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 539 Filed 08/08/25 PageID.30169 Page
6 of 7
1 THOMAS M. HEFFERON (pro hac vice)
THefferon@goodwinlaw.com
2 SABRINA M. ROSE-SMITH (pro hac vice)
SRoseSmith@goodwinlaw.com
3 GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
1900 N St. NW
4 Washington, DC 20036
Tel: +1 202 346 4000
5 Fax: +1 202 346 4444
6 JAMES W. MCGARRY (pro hac vice)
JMcGarry@goodwinlaw.com
7 GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
100 Northern Avenue
8 Boston, MA 02210
Tel.: +1 617 570 1000
9 Fax: +1 617 523 1231
10 LAURA G. BRYS (SBN 242100)
LBrys@goodwinlaw.com
11 GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
601 S Figueroa St., Suite 4100
12 Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel.: +1 213 426 2500
13 Fax: +1 617 346 4444
14 VALERIE A. HAGGANS (pro hac vice)
VHaggans@goodwinlaw.com
15 LINDSAY E. HOYLE (pro hac vice)
LHoyle@goodwinlaw.com
16 GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
620 Eighth Avenue
17 New York, NY 10018
Tel: +1 212 813-8800
18 Fax: +1 212 355-3333
19 YVONNE W. CHAN (pro hac vice)
YChan@jonesday.com
20 JONES DAY
100 High Street
21 Boston, MA 02110
Tel.: +1 617 960 3939
22 Fax: +1 617 449 6999
23 JANICE P. BROWN (SBN 114433)
jbrown@myersnave.com
24 MATTHEW B. NAZARETH (SBN
278405)
25 mnazareth@myersnave.com
MEYERS NAVE
26 600 B Street, Suite 1650
San Diego, CA 92101
27
Attorneys for Defendant
28 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
5
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SEAL CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-GPC-MSB
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 539 Filed 08/08/25 PageID.30170 Page
7 of 7
1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2 I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the clerk of the
3 court for the United States District Court for the Southern District of California by
4 using the CM/ECF system on August 8, 2025. I further certify that all participants
5 in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the
6 CM/ECF system. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and
7 correct.
8
9
10 Executed: August 8, 2025 s/ Valerie A. Haggans
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SEAL CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-GPC-MSB
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.casd.709615.539.0.pdf
- Size
- 175,808 bytes
- SHA-256
- ce5a0859d2e40852a34ac6983d4e50b4e39b34ee69d636887a5963049357ead2
- Original
- PACER (login required)