A.I.C., et al. v. Victor Corral, et al.

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedNovember 21, 2025
Docket2:25-cv-02575
StatusUnknown

This text of A.I.C., et al. v. Victor Corral, et al. (A.I.C., et al. v. Victor Corral, et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
A.I.C., et al. v. Victor Corral, et al., (C.D. Cal. 2025).

Opinion

1 THE AGUILERA LAW GROUP, APLC Eric Aguilera (SBN 192390) 2 Raymond Brown (SBN 164819) V. René Daley (SBN 199914) 3 23046 Avenida De La Carlota, Suite 300 4 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 T: 714-384-6600 / F: 714-384-6601 5 eaguilera@aguileragroup.com rbrown@aguileragroup.com 6 rdaley@aguileragroup.com Attorneys for plaintiffs 7 8 Attorneys for plaintiffs A.I.C. (a minor), Anthony Charles Francisco Cachua, and Luz Maria Cachua 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 A.I.C., et al., Case No.: 2:25-cv-02575 -SPG-(RAOx) 13 Plaintiffs, Complaint served: March 24, 2025 Trial: June 2, 2025 14 vs. [PROPOSED] STIPULATED 15 VICTOR CORRAL, et al., PROTECTIVE ORDER 16 Defendants. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 1. A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 2 Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential or private 3 information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any 4 purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties 5 hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated Protective 6 Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on 7 all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public 8 disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to 9 confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. 10 11 B. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT 12 The Parties represent that pre-trial discovery in this case is likely to include the 13 production of information and/or documents that are confidential and/or privileged 14 including the production of medical records and the production of peace officer 15 personnel file information and/or documents which the Parties agree includes: 16 (1) personal data, including marital status, family members, educational and 17 employment history, home addresses, or similar information; (2) medical history; 18 (3) election of employee benefits; (4) employee advancement, appraisal, or discipline; 19 and (5) complaints, or investigations of complaints, concerning an event or transaction 20 in which a peace officer participated, or which a peace officer perceived, and pertaining 21 to the manner in which the peace officer performed his or her duties including compelled 22 statements by peace officers unless specifically denoted as “not confidential” pursuant 23 to Penal Code section 832.7. Defendants contend that such information is privileged as 24 official information. Sanchez v. City of Santa Ana, 936 F.2d 1027, 1033 (9th Cir. Cal. 25 1990); see also Kerr v. United States Dist. Ct. for N.D. Cal., 511 F.2d 192, 198 (9th 26 Cir.1975), aff'd, 426 U.S. 394, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976). Further, discovery 27 may require the production of certain Los Angeles Police Department policies, 28 procedures, and logs not available to the public and the public disclosure of which 1 Defendants contend could comprise officer safety, raise security issues, and/or impede 2 investigations. 3 Defendants contend that public disclosure of such material poses a substantial risk 4 of embarrassment, oppression and/or physical harm to peace officers. Defendants 5 further contend that the risk of harm to peace officers is greater than with other 6 government employees due to the nature of their profession. Finally, Defendants 7 contend that the benefit of public disclosure of the material discussed in the prior 8 paragraph is minimal while the potential disadvantages are great. 9 Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt 10 resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect 11 information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the parties are 12 permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the 13 conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends 14 of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this matter. It is the 15 intent of the parties that information will not be designated as confidential for tactical 16 reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it has been 17 maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and there is good cause why it should 18 not be part of the public record of this case. 19 20 C. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PROCEDURE FOR FILING UNDER SEAL 21 The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this 22 Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under 23 seal; Local Civil Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the 24 standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file 25 material under seal. 26 There is a strong presumption that the public has a right of access to judicial 27 proceedings and records in civil cases. In connection with non-dispositive motions, good 28 cause must be shown to support a filing under seal. See Kamakana v. City and County 1 of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006); Phillips v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 2 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002); Makar-Welbon v. Sony Electrics, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 3 576, 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999) (even stipulated protective orders require good cause 4 showing), and a specific showing of good cause or compelling reasons with proper 5 evidentiary support and legal justification, must be made with respect to Protected 6 Material that a party seeks to file under seal. The parties’ mere designation of Disclosure 7 or Discovery Material as CONFIDENTIAL does not—without the submission of 8 competent evidence by declaration, establishing that the material sought to be filed under 9 seal qualifies as confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable—constitute good 10 cause. 11 Further, if a party requests sealing related to a dispositive motion or trial, then 12 compelling reasons, not only good cause, for the sealing must be shown, and the relief 13 sought shall be narrowly tailored to serve the specific interest to be protected. SeePintos 14 v. Pacific Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 677-79 (9th Cir. 2010). For each item or type 15 of information, document, or thing sought to be filed or introduced under seal in 16 connection with a dispositive motion or trial, the party seeking protection must articulate 17 compelling reasons, supported by specific facts and legal justification, for the requested 18 sealing order. Again, competent evidence supporting the application to file documents 19 under seal must be provided by declaration. 20 Any document that is not confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable in its 21 entirety will not be filed under seal if the confidential portions can be redacted. If 22 documents can be redacted, then a redacted version for public viewing, omitting only 23 the confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable portions of the document shall be 24 filed. Any application that seeks to file documents under seal in their entirety should 25 include an explanation of why redaction is not feasible. 26 27 2. DEFINITIONS 28 2.1. Action: This pending federal lawsuit. 1 2.2. Challenging Party: A Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of 2 information or items under this Order. 3 2.3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
A.I.C., et al. v. Victor Corral, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aic-et-al-v-victor-corral-et-al-cacd-2025.