MD Helicopters Inc. v. United States of Am. (D. Ariz. 2019). · Go Syfert
MD Helicopters Inc. v. United States of Am. (D. Ariz. 2019). Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
MD Helicopters Incorporated
v.
United States of America
2:19-cv-02236.
District Court, D. Arizona.
Aug 5, 2019.
Unknown

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

MD Helicopters Incorporated, No. CV-19-02236-PHX-JAT

Plaintiff, ORDER v. United States of America, et al., Defendants.

Pending before the Court are the Federal Defendants’ Motion to File Expert Report of Dr. Timothy Sestak Under Seal (Doc. 120) and Plaintiff MD Helicopters Incorporated’s (“MDHI”) Motion to File Plaintiff’s Position Brief Re Expert Disclosure Deadlines Under Seal (Doc. 117). The Federal Defendants’ Motion to seal Dr. Sestak’s expert report avers that this report not only includes express quotations and references to sealed portions of the administrative record, but contains information protected from disclosure under the Protective Order entered in this case and under federal statutes, specifically 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(h) and 10 U.S.C. § 130. (Doc. 120 at 2–3). The Federal Defendants’ further state that the information contained in Dr. Sestak’s report may also be subject to claims of trade secret protection by MDHI. (Id. at 3). The Court will grant the Federal Defendants’ Motion (Doc. 120) for the reasons stated in the Court’s June 7, 2019 Order (Doc. 81). MDHI’s Motion to seal its position statement regarding expert disclosures states || that this position brief contains factual material and related opinion that consists of trade 2|| secret information because it reveals the substance of its proposal submitted to the Army || under the FARA CP solicitation. (Doc. 117 at 2). Particularly, MDHI’s position brief discusses Dr. Sestak’s expert report, which includes material concerning MDHI’s proposal as well as the Army’s evaluation of MDHI’s proposal. U/d.). MDHI also avers that the material in its position brief constitutes source selection information that is protected from disclosure pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(h), which incorporates the Procurement Integrity 8}| Act, 41 U.S.C. § 2102. Ud.). The Court will grant MDHI’s Motion (Doc. 117) for the reasons stated in the Court’s June 7, 2019 Order (Doc. 81). 10 Finding “compelling reasons” to do so, Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 11] 447 F.3d 1172, 1180 (9th Cir. 2006), 12 IT IS ORDERED that the Federal Defendants’ Motion to File Expert Report of 13 || Dr. Timothy Sestak Under Seal (Doc. 120) is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to file under seal the document presently lodged at Doc. 121. 15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that MDHI’s Motion to File Plaintiff’s Position || Brief Re Expert Disclosure Deadlines Under Seal (Doc. 117) is GRANTED. The Clerk of 17 || the Court is directed to file under seal the document presently lodged at Doc. 118. 18 Dated this 2nd day of August, 2019. 19 20 21 a _& / c James A. Teilorg 22 Senior United States District Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-