A federal district court in Indiana has held that court filings may remain under confidential seal in accordance with the parties' arbitration agreement, pending immediate resolution of the matter through either dismissal of the court action or a motion to compel arbitration.

In Walker v. Gore, No. 1:08-cv-0549-DFH-WTL, 2008 WL 4649091 (S.D. Ind. Oct. 20, 2008), Walker and Gore had a contractual business relationship involving automobile racing. Walker sued Gore for breach of contract, but asked the Court to keep the parties' contracts and arbitration agreement under seal lest Walker violate the contracts' confidentiality provisions.

The Court temporarily granted the motion to seal, but ordered Gore to show cause why the contracts should remain under seal. Gore argued that the parties had agreed to arbitration to keep the terms of their contracts confidential, and maintaining the seal was consistent with the parties' contractual intent.

After the parties did not respond to the Court's further inquiries, the Court determined that the filings should remain under seal, but only pending either an immediate dismissal of the complaint or a decision to compel arbitration. The Court found "[t]he best argument for sealing at least the contract and the complaint is that [Gore is] clearly entitled to compel arbitration of all claims asserted." Preserving the confidentiality of the contracts was consistent with the parties' apparent arbitration agreement, as "[p]eople who want secrecy should opt for arbitration" rather than litigation.

Accordingly, because the Court had invested no time in resolving the merits of the dispute and the asserted claims were likely subject to a valid arbitration agreement, the Court preserved the seal on the filings pending the parties' notification of settlement or a motion to compel arbitration.