Practical Shooting Insights reports on the Eighth Circuit fight over Sig Sauer’s P320 FMECA documents, linked to Glasscock v. Sig Sauer. The Trace, a media intervenor, moves to intervene in the appeal to oppose sealed filings tied to class certification and the FMECA, arguing for the public’s right of access given the district court’s extensive reliance on the FMECA. Sig Sauer counters that some material is national‑security related and seeks time for the Army to weigh in, framing the FMECA as controlled technical information under the MHS contract and urging continued secrecy. A new development is the emergence of a second FMECA record—the FMECA Memorandum—alongside the previously publicly discussed Spreadsheet, raising questions about authorship and contents. The Trace’s filing notes that the unredacted FMECA was found on CourtListener, de‑obscured, and published on PSI, where it remains available, and describes Sig Sauer executives directing listeners to PSI to view the document. The briefing cites DoD Instruction 5230.24, arguing it does not authorize withholding unclassified information about evaluations of performance and reliability, and points out that the PSI copy carries no DoD distribution markings. The piece emphasizes that the FMECA's presence influenced class‑notice and risk‑mitigation questions in the district court, meaning maintaining seal could blunt public scrutiny of a high‑stakes product‑safety dispute. The author, an independent site operator, positions PSI as continuing to publish filings and analysis so readers can compare arguments to the underlying documents. What to watch next: whether the Eighth Circuit permits intervention with a strong presumption of public access to class‑certification records; whether the Army weighs in and on what basis; and whether the FMECA Memorandum is disclosed, which could illuminate internal framing of hazards and fixes relevant to consumer‑protection claims.