Dykstra v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.

Full title: Nathaniel Dykstra, Plaintiff, v. Aetna Life Insurance Company, et al.…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Date published: Jul 25, 2018

No. CV-17-02620-PHX-JAT (D. Ariz. Jul. 25, 2018)

Opinion

No. CV-17-02620-PHX-JAT

07-25-2018

Nathaniel Dykstra, Plaintiff, v. Aetna Life Insurance Company, et al., Defendants.

James A. Teilborg Senior United States District Judge

ORDER

Pending before the Court is the parties' stipulation to extend time to file the administrative record. Discovery closed in this case on April 27, 2018. The administrative record is currently due to be filed with the Court by July 27, 2018. Plaintiff's opening brief is due by August 31, 2018. The parties now seek to file the administrative record on November 2, 2018, the same date the reply brief in this case is due.

The parties are expected to cite to the administrative record in their briefing. The Court would expect this citation to correspond to the administrative record on file with the Court. See Wallace v. Bashas' Inc. Grp. Disability Plan, 428 F. App'x 681, 682 (9th Cir. 2011) (dismissing an appeal because the record in an ERISA case was too confusing). Thus, the parties' request to file the administrative record after the close of briefing is denied.

Further, the Court is concerned that the parties' stipulation assumes that they may file the administrative record under seal. (Doc. 22). This assumption is incorrect. The parties may redact any information covered by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2 without leave of Court. However, the entire administrative record will not be sealed. If the parties seek to seal a particular line of the administrative record, the parties make seek leave to redact (and seal) such line from the public record, on a line by line basis, citing to the relevant case law which would permit that specific information to be kept from the public record. See Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179-80 (9^th Cir. 2006); Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1096-97 (9th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. FCA U.S. LLC v. Ctr. for Auto Safety, 137 S. Ct. 38, 196 L. Ed. 2d 26 (2016).¹

1 If the parties file such a motion to seal, while the parties are waiting for a ruling from the Court on the motion to seal, the parties must file a public version of the administrative record, redacting each line they seek to seal, and lodge under seal an unredacted version of the administrative record. --------

Based on the foregoing,

IT IS ORDERED that the stipulation (Doc. 22) is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file the administrative record no later than August 10, 2018.

Dated this 25th day of July, 2018.

/s/_________

James A. Teilborg

Senior United States District Judge