Full text
MOTION TO SEAL STAY HEARING TRANSCRIPT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JAMES W. MCGARRY (pro hac vice)
JMcGarry@goodwinlaw.com
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
100 Northern Avenue
Boston, MA 02210
Tel.: +1 617 570 1000
Fax: +1 617 523 1231
SABRINA M. ROSE-SMITH (pro hac
vice)
SRoseSmith@goodwinlaw.com
MATTHEW L. RIFFEE (pro hac vice)
MRiffee@goodwinlaw.com
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
1900 N Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Tel.: +1 202 346 4000
Fax: +1 202 346 4444
Attorneys for Defendant
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
[ADDITIONAL COUNSEL LISTED IN
SIGNATURE BLOCK]
UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN DIEGO DIVISION
IN RE: BANK OF AMERICA
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT
BENEFITS LITIGATION
Case No. 21-MD-02992-GPC-MSB
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SEAL
PORTIONS OF STAY HEARING
TRANSCRIPT
Ctrm: 2D – 2nd Floor
Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 457 Filed 04/23/25 PageID.26920 Page
1 of 6
1
MOTION TO SEAL STAY HEARING TRANSCRIPT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 79.2(c),
Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“Defendant” or “BANA”) hereby submits this
Motion to Seal Portions of the Stay Hearing Transcript as set forth in the concurrently
lodged under seal Exhibit A to this Motion. In particular, BANA seeks to seal
portions of the transcript (the “Hearing Transcript” or “Hr’g Tr.”) of the March 28,
2025 hearing on Defendant’s Motion to Stay (the “Hearing”) because good cause and
compelling reasons support sealing of those portions of the Hearing Transcript.
Consistent with the Court’s prior instructions concerning the sealing of hearing
transcripts and the guidance set forth in the Court’s prior sealing orders, BANA
proposes sealing the highlighted portions of the Hearing Transcript concurrently
lodged as Exhibit A. As previously stated in BANA’s motions to seal, the public’s
right to inspect and copy judicial records is not absolute, and a party faced with the
disclosure of confidential or proprietary information may seek to file the documents
under seal to avoid disclosure of business information that might result in competitive
harm or be used for improper purposes. See Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435
U.S. 589, 598 (1978) (denying disclosure); Local Civ. R. 79.2(c). Accordingly, the
Parties filed various motions to seal (the “Motions to Seal,” ECF Nos. 328, 337, 344,
347, 376, 383, 384, 394, 418) certain documents (or portions thereof) in connection
with briefing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and argument (ECF Nos.
324, 349, 378). The Court largely granted those Motions to Seal, finding compelling
reasons to seal documents concerning BANA’s fraud detection and prevention
policies and strategies, BANA’s analyses of claims fraud and potential strategies to
combat that fraud, and BANA’s Remediation Plans with the regulators and
documents showing BANA’s implementation of those Plans, among other categories
of confidential information. See ECF Nos. 365, 381, 390, 391, 397, 421 (the “Sealing
Orders”).
Consistent with the Court’s Sealing Orders, there are compelling reasons to
seal portions of the Hearing Transcript at issue here, which reflect topics that are
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 457 Filed 04/23/25 PageID.26921 Page
2 of 6
2
MOTION TO SEAL STAY HEARING TRANSCRIPT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
likely to cause particularized competitive harm to BANA and which could potentially
enable future fraud, and thus pose a danger to BANA’s business and the public. See,
e.g., East West Bank v. Shanker, 2021 WL 3112452, at *18-19 (N.D. Cal. July 22,
2021) (finding compelling reasons to seal where public disclosure of EWB’s
confidential onboarding processes, verification of customer identities and fraud
prevention measures would “harm [the bank’s] competitive standing”); Soria v. U.S.
Bank N.A., 2019 WL 8167925, at *4 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2019) (finding compelling
reasons to seal bank’s internal procedures for investigating fraud because there was
a “significant danger that someone could improperly use this information to commit
fraud and avoid detection”).
The portions of the Hearing Transcript that BANA seeks to seal reflect
information derived from previously sealed documents (or portions thereof),
including but not limited to, the Declaration of William M. Martin in Support of
Defendant’s Opposition to Class Certification (ECF 350-8), the Declaration of
Jennifer Lennon in Support of Defendant’s Opposition to Class Certification (ECF
350-9), and data reflecting certain populations of cardholders subject to BANA’s
remediation efforts (ECF 386-4; ECF 350-44). Each of those documents was
designated Confidential or Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only by BANA,
and in the case of the Remediation Plans and its implementation, by the regulators as
well. And each of those documents and the discussions thereof reflect BANA’s
confidential fraud review processes and details regarding BANA’s implementation
of the Plans, which are the same categories of information that this Court has already
found compelling reasons to seal. See ECF 365, 381, 390, 391, 397, 421; see also
344-3 (Lennon Decl.), 347-1 (Martin Decl.).
For the foregoing reasons and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s Sealing
Orders in connection with class certification briefing and argument (ECF Nos. 365,
381, 390, 391, 397), Plaintiffs’ Motions to Seal (ECF Nos. 376, 384, 394), BANA’s
prior Motions to Seal (ECF Nos. 328, 337, 344, 347, 383, 418) and accompanying
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 457 Filed 04/23/25 PageID.26922 Page
3 of 6
3
MOTION TO SEAL STAY HEARING TRANSCRIPT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
declarations submitted in support (ECF Nos. 344-1, 344-2, 344-3, 347-1, 347-2), and
the argument presented at the hearing on Defendant’s Motion to Seal, all of which
are incorporated herein by reference, BANA respectfully requests that the Court
grant Defendant’s Motion to Seal Portions of the Stay Hearing Transcript because
good cause and compelling reasons support sealing thereof.
Respectfully submitted,
Dated: April 23, 2025
By:
s/ James W. McGarry__
JAMES W. MCGARRY (pro hac vice)
JMcGarry@goodwinlaw.com
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
100 Northern Avenue
Boston, MA 02210
Tel.: +1 617 570 1000
Fax: +1 617 523 1231
SABRINA M. ROSE-SMITH (pro hac
vice)
SRoseSmith@goodwinlaw.com
MATTHEW L. RIFFEE (pro hac vice)
MRiffee@goodwinlaw.com
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
1900 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: +1 202 346 4000
Fax: +1 202 346 4444
LAURA G. BRYS (SBN 242100)
LBrys@goodwinlaw.com
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
601 S Figueroa St., Suite 4100
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel.: +1 213 426 2500
Fax: +1 617 346 4444
VALERIE A. HAGGANS (pro hac vice)
VHaggans@goodwinlaw.com
LINDSAY E. HOYLE (pro hac vice)
LHoyle@goodwinlaw.com
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10018
Tel: +1 212 813-8800
Fax: +1 212 355-3333
YVONNE W. CHAN (pro hac vice)
YChan@jonesday.com
JONES DAY
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 457 Filed 04/23/25 PageID.26923 Page
4 of 6
4
MOTION TO SEAL STAY HEARING TRANSCRIPT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
100 High Street
Boston, MA 02110
Tel.: +1 617 960 3939
Fax: +1 617 449 6999
JANICE P. BROWN (SBN 114433)
jbrown@myersnave.com
MATTHEW B. NAZARETH (SBN
278405)
mnazareth@myersnave.com
MEYERS NAVE
600 B Street, Suite 1650
San Diego, CA 92101
Attorneys for Defendant
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 457 Filed 04/23/25 PageID.26924 Page
5 of 6
5
MOTION TO SEAL STAY HEARING TRANSCRIPT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the clerk of the
court for the United States District Court for the Southern District of California by
using the CM/ECF system on April 23, 2025. I further certify that all participants in
the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the
CM/ECF system. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.
Executed:
April 23, 2025
s/ James W. McGarry
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 457 Filed 04/23/25 PageID.26925 Page
6 of 6