Amber Widby v. County of Los Angeles, Eli Vera, Angela Carrasco, and Does 1-20, inclusive

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedJanuary 16, 2026
Docket2:25-cv-05648
StatusUnknown

This text of Amber Widby v. County of Los Angeles, Eli Vera, Angela Carrasco, and Does 1-20, inclusive (Amber Widby v. County of Los Angeles, Eli Vera, Angela Carrasco, and Does 1-20, inclusive) 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
Amber Widby v. County of Los Angeles, Eli Vera, Angela Carrasco, and Does 1-20, inclusive, (C.D. Cal. 2026).

Opinion

4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WESTERN DIVISION 11 AMBER WIDBY, an individual; CASE NO. 2:25-cv-05648 DMG (JCx) 12 [Assigned to Hon. Dolly M. Gee in 13 Plaintiff, Courtroom 8C] 14 vs. STIPULATED PROTECTIVE 15 ORDER 16 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, a California public entity; ELI [CHANGES MADE BY COURT TO 17 VERA, an individual; ANGELA PARAGRAPHS 3, 8, 9.3 &13] 18 CARRASCO, an individual; and DOES 1-20, inclusive; 19

20 Defendants. 21 1. INTRODUCTION 22 1.1 Purposes and Limitations. This civil rights action alleges, 23 among other claims, an unreasonable seizure, an unlawful search, a 24 conspiracy to violate civil rights, failure to intervene, deliberate indifference 25 to serious medical needs while in custody, and municipal liability against 26 the County of Los Angeles and individual Los Angeles County Sheriff’s 27 1 2024 at Plaintiff’s residence, Plaintiff’s subsequent arrest and detention, 2 and her medical treatment and housing in the Century Regional Detention 3 Facility (Lynwood Jail) and transfer to other facilities. Discovery in this 4 action is likely to involve production of confidential, proprietary, or private 5 information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use 6 for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. 7 Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the court to enter 8 the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that 9 this Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or 10 responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public 11 disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are 12 entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The 13 parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3 (Filing Protected 14 Material), below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle 15 them to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets 16 forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be 17 applied when a party seeks permission from the Court to file material under 18 seal. 19 1.2 Good Cause Statement. 20 This action is likely to involve body-worn camera recordings, 21 dispatch/incident reports, operational details concerning Los Angeles 22 Sheriff’s Department (“LASD”) response, protective sweeps, personal data 23 of civilians, Plaintiff’s probation information, Plaintiff’s correctional health 24 and jail security materials, including but not limited to Plaintiff’s personal 25 health information, medication records, medication administration records, 26 and Correctional Health Services’ (“CHS”) policies/protocols regarding 27 inmate medical care and medication handling within secured facilities, and 1 limited to witnesses and third parties identified in the pleadings, incident 2 reports, family members, medical staff, and other detainees, whose names, 3 contact information, and statements may appear in records and videos for 4 which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any 5 purpose other than prosecution of this action is warranted. Such 6 confidential and proprietary materials and information consist of, among 7 other things, information implicating privacy rights of third parties, 8 information otherwise generally unavailable to the public, or which may be 9 privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under state or federal 10 statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. Accordingly, to 11 expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of 12 disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect 13 information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the 14 parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in 15 preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the 16 end of the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this matter. It is the intent of the parties that 17 information will not be designated as confidential for tactical reasons and 18 that nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it has been 19 maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and there is good cause 20 why it should not be part of the public record of this case. 21 1.3 Acknowledgment of Procedure for Filing Under Seal. The 22 parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this 23 Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential 24 information under seal; Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must 25 be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks 26 permission from the court to file material under seal. 27 1 There is a strong presumption that the public has a right of access to 2 judicial proceedings and records in civil cases. In connection with non- 3 dispositive motions, good cause must be shown to support a filing under 4 seal. See Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 5 (9th Cir. 2006), Phillips ex rel. Ests. of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 6 1206, 1210–11 (9th Cir. 2002), Makar-Welbon v. Sony Elecs., Inc., 187 7 F.R.D. 576, 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999) (even stipulated protective orders require 8 good cause showing), and a specific showing of good cause or compelling 9 reasons with proper evidentiary support and legal justification, must be 10 made with respect to Protected Material that a party seeks to file under 11 seal. The parties’ mere designation of Disclosure or Discovery Material as 12 CONFIDENTIAL does not—without the submission of competent evidence 13 by declaration, establishing that the material sought to be filed under seal 14 qualifies as confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable—constitute 15 good cause. 16 Further, if a party requests sealing related to a dispositive motion or 17 trial, then compelling reasons, not only good cause, for the sealing must be 18 shown, and the relief sought shall be narrowly tailored to serve the specific 19 interest to be protected. See Pintos v. Pac. Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 20 677–79 (9th Cir. 2010). For each item or type of information, document, or 21 thing sought to be filed or introduced under seal in connection with a 22 dispositive motion or trial, the party seeking protection must articulate 23 compelling reasons, supported by specific facts and legal justification, for 24 the requested sealing order. Again, competent evidence supporting the 25 application to file documents under seal must be provided by declaration. 26 Any document that is not confidential, privileged, or otherwise 27 protectable in its entirety will not be filed under seal if the confidential 1 version for public viewing, omitting only the confidential, privileged, or 2 otherwise protectable portions of the document, shall be filed. Any 3 application that seeks to file documents under seal in their entirety should 4 include an explanation of why redaction is not feasible. 5 2. DEFINITIONS 6 2.1 Action: refers to Amber Widby v. County of Los Angeles, et al., 7 United States District Court, Central District, Case No.: 2:24-cv-05648 8 DMG (JCx), and any appeals through FINAL DISPOSITION. 9 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the 10 designation of information or items under this Order. 11 2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information 12 (regardless of how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things 13 that qualify for protection under Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil 14 Procedure, and as specified above in the Good Cause Statement. 15 2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as 16 well as their support staff).

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

Related

Pintos v. PACIFIC CREDITORS ASS'N
605 F.3d 665 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Burrell v. Hampshire County
307 F.3d 1 (First Circuit, 2002)
Silk v. Sieling
7 F.R.D. 576 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1947)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Amber Widby v. County of Los Angeles, Eli Vera, Angela Carrasco, and Does 1-20, inclusive, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amber-widby-v-county-of-los-angeles-eli-vera-angela-carrasco-and-does-cacd-2026.