You're viewing Docket Item 5 from the case Roberts et al v. SSM Health Care St. Louis. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




Case: 4:13-cv-01849-CDP Doc. #: 5 Filed: 09/20/13 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 31

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

EASTERN DIVISION

MAUREEN ROBERTS and
CHANEL JONES, individually
and on behalf of others similarly
situated,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

SSM HEALTH CARE ST. LOUIS,

Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:13 CV 1849 CDP

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This newly-filed case is before me on defendant’s motion for leave to file documents

under seal. This Fair Labor Standards Act case was settled before it was even filed. However,

because it involves FLSA collective and class claims, the settlement requires final approval by

the Court. Defendant wants to file the joint motion for certification of FLSA collective action

and for certification of Rule 23 class for settlement purposes, the proposed preliminary approval

of class settlement agreement, the proposed notice to the class members, and the class action

settlement agreement and accompanying exhibits under seal. While I will allow the settlement

agreement and any confidential exhibits to be filed under seal, I cannot allow the motions and

proposed orders to be filed under seal. The parties will be asking the Court to sign the proposed

approval and send out notice to class members, which means the documents will be part of the

public file. Therefore, it makes no sense why these documents should be filed under seal. I have

had many of these cases before, and the parties have always filed their motions and proposed

orders as part of the public record, even if the settlement agreement and confidential exhibits

Case: 4:13-cv-01849-CDP Doc. #: 5 Filed: 09/20/13 Page: 2 of 2 PageID #: 32

were filed under seal. I am confident that counsel can work together in this case to do the same

here.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant’s motion to file documents under seal [#4]

is granted only as follows: the parties may file their settlement agreement and any accompanying

confidential exhibits under seal. The motion is denied in all other respects.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, as this Court has been advised that this action is

settled, no later than October 21, 2013, the parties shall file any motions and proposed Orders

for the Court’s consideration regarding the final disposition of this matter.

CATHERINE D. PERRY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated this 20th day of September, 2013.

- 2 -