AMMANUEL MUZGEBE, an individual v. CONSOLIDATED DISPOSAL SERVICE, LLC

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedOctober 30, 2025
Docket2:25-cv-06138
StatusUnknown

This text of AMMANUEL MUZGEBE, an individual v. CONSOLIDATED DISPOSAL SERVICE, LLC (AMMANUEL MUZGEBE, an individual v. CONSOLIDATED DISPOSAL SERVICE, LLC) 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
AMMANUEL MUZGEBE, an individual v. CONSOLIDATED DISPOSAL SERVICE, LLC, (C.D. Cal. 2025).

Opinion

1 Kara A. Cole, Bar No. 306515 kcole@littler.com 2 LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 501 W. Broadway, Suite 900 3 San Diego, California 92101.3577 Telephone: 619.232.0441 4 Facsimile: 619.232.4302 5 Alexis M. Schwab, Bar No. 341397 aschwab@littler.com 6 LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 18565 Jamboree Road 7 Suite 800 Irvine, California 92612 8 Telephone: 949.705.3000 Facsimile: 949.724.1201 9 10 Attorneys For Defendant CONSOLIDATED DISPOSAL SERVICE, 11 LLC 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION 14 15 AMMANUEL MUZGEBE, an individual, Case No. 2:25−cv−06138−KS ___________ 16 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND PROPOSED PROTECTIVE ORDER 17 v. 18 CONSOLIDATED DISPOSAL SERVICE, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability 19 Company, and DOES 1 through 20, Complaint Filed: June 4, 2025 (Superior inclusive, Court of Los Angeles Case No. 20 25STCV16220) Defendants. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 I. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 2 Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, proprietary 3 or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use 4 for any purpose other than pursuing this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the 5 parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated 6 Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket 7 protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords 8 from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are 9 entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. 10 II. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT 11 This action is likely to involve trade secrets, customer and pricing lists and other 12 valuable research, development, commercial, financial, technical and/or proprietary 13 information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any 14 purpose other than prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential and 15 proprietary materials and information consist of, among other things, confidential business 16 or financial information, information regarding confidential business practices, or other 17 confidential research, development, or commercial information (including information 18 implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise generally unavailable to 19 the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under state 20 or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. Accordingly, to expedite 21 the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality 22 of discovery materials, to adequately protect information the parties are entitled to keep 23 confidential, to ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of such 24 material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end 25 of the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is 26 justified in this matter. It is the intent of the parties that information will not be designated 27 as confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good faith 28 belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and there is good 1 cause why it should not be part of the public record of this case. 2 III. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF UNDER SEAL FILING PROCEDURE 3 The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 14.3, below, that this 4 Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under 5 seal; Local Civil Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the 6 standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material 7 under seal. There is a strong presumption that the public has a right of access to judicial 8 proceedings and records in civil cases. In connection with non-dispositive motions, good 9 cause must be shown to support a filing under seal. See Kamakana v. City and County of 10 Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006), Phillips v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 11 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002), Makar-Welbon v. Sony Electrics, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 576, 12 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999) (even stipulated protective orders require good cause showing), and 13 a specific showing of good cause or compelling reasons with proper evidentiary support 14 and legal justification, must be made with respect to Protected Material that a party seeks 15 to file under seal. The parties’ mere designation of Disclosure or Discovery Material as 16 CONFIDENTIAL does not— without the submission of competent evidence by 17 declaration, establishing that the material sought to be filed under seal qualifies as 18 confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable—constitute good cause. 19 Further, if a party requests sealing related to a dispositive motion or trial, then 20 compelling reasons, not only good cause, for the sealing must be shown, and the relief 21 sought shall be narrowly tailored to serve the specific interest to be protected. See Pintos 22 v. Pacific Creditors Ass’n., 605 F.3d 665, 677-79 (9th Cir. 2010). For each item or type 23 of information, document, or thing sought to be filed or introduced under seal, the party 24 seeking protection must articulate compelling reasons, supported by specific facts and 25 legal justification, for the requested sealing order. Again, competent evidence supporting 26 the application to file documents under seal must be provided by declaration. 27 Any document that is not confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable in its 28 entirety will not be filed under seal if the confidential portions can be redacted. If 1 documents can be redacted, then a redacted version for public viewing, omitting only the 2 confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable portions of the document, shall be filed. 3 Any application that seeks to file documents under seal in their entirety should include an 4 explanation of why redaction is not feasible. 5 IV. DEFINITIONS 6 4.1 Action: Ammanuel Muzgebe v. Consolidated Disposal Service, LLC, et al., 7 Case No. 2:25-CV-06138-KS. 8 4.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of 9 information or items under this Order. 10 4.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it 11 is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under 12 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in the Good Cause 13 Statement. 14 4.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as their 15 support staff). 16 4.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items 17 that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 18 4.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the 19 medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other 20 things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in 21 disclosures or responses to discovery. 22 4.7 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter 23 pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an 24 expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 25 4.8 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action. House 26 Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
AMMANUEL MUZGEBE, an individual v. CONSOLIDATED DISPOSAL SERVICE, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ammanuel-muzgebe-an-individual-v-consolidated-disposal-service-llc-cacd-2025.