Accordius Health at Asheville LLC v. United States Small Business Administration et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL CASE NO. 1:23-cv-00129-MR
ACCORDIUS HEALTH AT )
ASHEVILLE LLC, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) O R D E R
)
UNITED STATES SMALL BUSINESS )
ADMINISTRATION, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
_______________________________ )
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the parties’ Joint Motion to Seal
the Administrative Record Pending Redaction of Confidential Information
[Doc. 18].
By the present motion, the parties move for leave to file under seal the
consolidated administrative record applicable to this matter and the 47
related cases also pending before this Court. [Doc. 18].
The press and the public have, under both the First Amendment and
the common law, a qualified right of access to judicial documents and
records filed in civil and criminal proceedings. Doe v. Public Citizen, 749
F.3d 246, 265 (4th Cir. 2014). “The common-law presumptive right of access
extends to all judicial documents and records, and the presumption can be
Case 1:23-cv-00129-MR Document 23 Filed 11/17/23 Page 1 of 3

2
rebutted only by showing that ‘countervailing interests heavily outweigh the
public interests in access.’” Id. at 265-66 (quoting in part Rushford v. New
Yorker Magazine, Inc., 846 F.2d 249, 253 (4th Cir. 1988)). The First
Amendment right of access “may be restricted only if closure is ‘necessitated
by a compelling government interest’ and the denial of access is ‘narrowly
tailored to serve that interest.’” Id. at 266 (quoting in part In re Wash. Post
Co., 807 F.2d 383, 390 (4th Cir. 1986)).
When presented with a motion to seal, the law of this Circuit requires
this Court to: “(1) provide public notice of the request to seal and allow
interested parties a reasonable opportunity to object, (2) consider less
drastic alternatives to sealing the documents, and (3) provide specific
reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents
and for rejecting the alternatives.” Ashcraft v. Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 288,
302 (4th Cir. 2000).
In the present case, the public has been provided with adequate notice
and an opportunity to object to the parties’ motion. The motion was filed on
November 13, 2023, and it has been accessible to the public through the
Court’s electronic case filing system since that time. Further, the parties
have demonstrated that the consolidated administrative record contains
confidential business and personal information, such as Social Security
Case 1:23-cv-00129-MR Document 23 Filed 11/17/23 Page 2 of 3

3
numbers, employer identification numbers, bank account numbers, and
personal contact information, and that the public’s right of access to such
information is substantially outweighed by the compelling interest in
protecting the details of such information from public disclosure. Finally,
having considered less drastic alternatives to sealing the documents, the
Court concludes that the sealing of the consolidated administrative record,
along with the filing of a redacted version of that record on the public docket,
is narrowly tailored to serve the interest of protecting this sensitive
information.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motion to Seal
the Administrative Record Pending Redaction of Confidential Information
[Doc. 18] is GRANTED, and the consolidated administrative record shall be
filed under seal and shall remain under seal pending further Order of this
Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file a redacted
version of the consolidated administrative record on the public docket of this
action no later than November 30, 2023.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed: November 16, 2023
Case 1:23-cv-00129-MR Document 23 Filed 11/17/23 Page 3 of 3