Bajwa v. United States Life Insurance Company

District Court, E.D. California·Decided September 9, 2019·No. 1:19-cv-00938·Unknown

Opinion

Jodi K. Swick No. 228634 Allison J. Fernandez No. 272853 McDOWELL HETHERINGTON LLP 1 Kaiser Plaza, Suite 340 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: 510.628.2145 Facsimile: 510.628.2146 Email: jodi.swick@mhllp.com allison.fernandez@mhllp.com

Attorneys for Defendant THE UNITED STATES LIFE INSURANCE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA –FRESNO DIVISION

AHSAN BAJWA, Case No. 1:19-cv-00938-LJO-SAB Plaintiff, Honorable Lawrence J. O’Neill Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone v. ORDER RE STIPULATED PROTECTIVE UNITED STATES LIFE INSURANCE ORDER COMPANY, and DOES 1through 50, inclusive, Complaint filed: June 6, 2019 Removal filed: July 10, 2019 Defendants.

1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS Disclosure and discovery activity in this Action are likely to involve production of confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this Action may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter 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, as set forth in Section 13.3 below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 141(a)-(f) sets 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. 2. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT This Action is likely to involve defendant The United States Life Insurance Company in the City of New York’s proprietary information, trade secrets, and other valuable research, development, commercial, financial, or technical information, including but not limited to insurance claims handling manuals, procedures, and policies, for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this Action is warranted. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to prevent unnecessary court- involvement, 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 reasonable necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial in this Action, to address their handling at the end of this Action, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this Action. 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, non-public manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record in this Action. 3. DEFINITIONS 3.1 Action: Ahsan Bajwa v. United States Life Insurance Company in the City of New York et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-00938-LJO-SAB, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. 3.2 Authorized Individual: a person enumerated in Sections 8.2.1-8.2.8, below. 3.3 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of information or items under this Order. 3.4 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is generated, stored, or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in the Good Cause Statement. 3.5 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and In-House Counsel (as well as their support staff). 3.6 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 3.7 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 Action. 3.8 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to this action who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 3.9 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. 3.10 Non-Party: 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 which has appeared on behalf of that Party (and includes support staff). 3.11 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 which has appeared on behalf of that Party (and includes support staff). 3.12 Party: any Party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staffs). 3.13 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery Material in this Action. 3.14 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. 3.15 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 3.16 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a Producing Party. 4. SCOPE The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. However, the protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order do not cover the following information: (a) any information that is in the public domain at the time of disclosure to a Receiving Party or becomes part of the public domain after its disclosure to a Receiving Party as a result of publication not involving a violation of this Order, including becoming part of the public record through trial or otherwise; and (b) any information known to the Receiving Party prior to the disclosure or obtained by the Receiving Party after the disclosure from a source who obtained the information lawfully and under no obligation of confidentiality to the Designating Party. Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by orders of the trial judge. This Order does not govern the use of Protected Material at trial. 5. DURATION Even after final disposition of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations imposed by this Order shall remain in effect until a Designating Party agrees otherwise in writing or a court order otherwise directs. Final disposition shall be deemed to be the later of (1) dismissal of all claims and defenses in this Action, with or without prejudice; and (2) final judgment herein after the completion and exhaustion of all appeals, rehearings, remands, trials, or reviews of this Action, includi

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

Bajwa v. United States Life Insurance Company, (E.D. Cal. 2019).

Bajwa v. United States Life Insurance Company (Bajwa v. United States Life Insurance Company) — 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)