AssuredPartners of Nevada LLC v. DeHart

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided October 15, 2021·No. 3:21-cv-00433·Unknown

Opinion

Z. KATHRYN BRANSON, ESQ., Bar No. 11540 LITTLER MENDELSON P.C. 3960 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 300 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169-5937 Telephone: 702.862.8800 Fax No.: 702.862.8811 Email: kbranson@littler.com THOMAS W. CARROLL, ESQ., CO Bar No. 41438 (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 1900 Sixteenth Street, Suite 800 Denver, Colorado 80202-5835 Telephone: 303.629.6200 Fax No.: 303.629.0200 Email: tcarroll@littler.com JAMES M. WITZ, ESQ., IL Bar No. 6210443 (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) LITTLER MENDELSON P.C. 321 North Clark Street, Suite 1100 Chicago, Illinois 60654 Telephone: 312.372.5520 Fax No.: 312.372.7880 Email: jwitz@littler.com Attorneys for Defendant L/P INSURANCE SERVICES, LLC ASSUREDPARTNERS OF NEVADA, Case No. 3:21-cv-00433-RCJ-WGC LLC, Plaintiff, STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER AND v. L/P INSURANCE SERVICES, LLC; DEANNA DEHART; COURTNEY PINO; CHRISTOPHER “BRYCE” WARNER; GIGI BRADLEY; and HEATHER PIATT; Defendants. AssuredPartners of Nevada, LLC (“Assured”), L/P Insurance Services, LLC (“LP”), Deanna DeHart, Courtney Pino, Christopher Warner, Gigi Bradley, and Heather Piatt (collectively “Individual Defendants”) (all parties collectively referred to as “the Parties”) hereby stipulate to, agree to, and respectfully move this Court for entry of a protective order in accordance with the terms set forth below. Discovery in this action is likely to involve the Production of trade secrets and confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting or defending this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the Parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court for entry of the following Stipulated Protective Order. The Parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The Parties further acknowledge that this Stipulated Protective Order does not automatically entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Local Rules set forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal. This action is likely to involve the disclosure of material protected under the constitutional, statutory, or common-law right to privacy or protected as trade secrets as well as confidential business, financial, proprietary, or private personnel, policy, and payroll information. Such confidential and proprietary materials and information consist of, among other things, confidential information regarding current and former employees, confidential business or financial information, confidential client information, information regarding confidential business practices, and other confidential commercial information (including information implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise generally unavailable to the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information the Parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the Parties are permitted reasonably necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the 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 information will not be designated as confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, nonpublic manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of this case. A. Action: the above referenced matter titled AssuredPartners of Nevada, LLC v. LP Insurance Services, LLC et al, No. 3:21-cv-00433-RCJ-WGC, in the United States District Court, District of Nevada. B. Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of information or items under this Order. C. “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information that has not been made public or is not otherwise available or accessible in the public domain and that concerns or relates to the proprietary information of the Parties or any third parties. Confidential Information also includes, but is not limited to, (1) private information pertaining to LP’s, Plaintiff’s, or a third party’s employees, for which LP, Plaintiff, or a third party has a duty to maintain its confidentiality; (2) nonpublic personal identifying information such as Social Security numbers of any party, any employee, agent, officer, or representative of any party, or any third party; and (c) nonpublic personal or proprietary financial, marketing, or business information of any party, any employee, agent, officer, or representative of any party, or any third party, such as bank accounts and routing numbers (and which does not otherwise meet the definition for financial information described in Section II.D). D. HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY: information that is either (1) information that reveals trade secrets; or (2) other highly confidential business, research, technical, commercial, marketing, or financial information that the party has maintained as confidential and review by another party to these proceedings would put the producing party at a competitive disadvantage regarding their business or business activities. Information or documents that are available to the public may not be designated as HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – E. Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” F. Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. G. Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action, including such Expert’s support staff. H. House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action. House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel. I. Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. J. Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a Party to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this Action and have appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm that has appeared on behalf of that party, including support staff. K. Party: any party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors, members, managers, employees, consultants, Experts, and Outside Counsel of Record. L. Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery Material in this Action. M. Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors. N. Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” O. Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a

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

AssuredPartners of Nevada LLC v. DeHart, (D. Nev. 2021).

AssuredPartners of Nevada LLC v. DeHart (AssuredPartners of Nevada LLC v. DeHart) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pintos v. PACIFIC CREDITORS ASS'N
605 F.3d 665 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
United States v. Lowell M. Birrell
447 F.2d 1168 (Second Circuit, 1971)
Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC
809 F.3d 1092 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)