Brock v. Amazon.com Services LLC

District Court, E.D. California·Decided April 22, 2024·No. 1:23-cv-00613·Unknown

Opinion

1 Douglas E. Dexter (State Bar No. 115868) ddexter@fbm.com 2 Jamie E.S. Talt (State Bar No. 312853) jtalt@fbm.com 3 Emily J. Tripodi (State Bar No. 334054) etripodi@fbm.com 4 Farella Braun + Martel LLP One Bush Street, Suite 900 5 San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: (415) 954-4400 6 Facsimile: (415) 954-4480

7 Attorneys for Defendant AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC 8 Neama Rahmani (State Bar No. 223819) 9 efilings@westcoasttriallawyers.com Ronald L. Zambrano (State Bar No. 255613) 10 ron@westcoasttriallawyers.com Crystal F. Mohsin (State Bar No. 333299) 11 crystal@westcoasttriallawyers.com West Coast Employment Lawyers, APLC 12 1147 South Hope Street Los Angeles, California 90015 13 Telephone: (213) 927-3700 Facsimile: (213) 927-3701 14 Attorneys for Plaintiff SCOTT BROCK 15

16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 19 SCOTT BROCK, an individual, Case No. 1:23-CV-00613-KES-CDB

20 Plaintiff, JOINT STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 21 vs. The Hon. U.S. Magistrate Judge Christopher 22 AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, a D. Baker Delaware Corporation; and DOES ` through 23 10, inclusive, Action Filed: March 14, 2023 Removal Date: April 24, 2023 24 Defendants. Trial Date: April 22, 2025

25 26 1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 27 Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to involve production of 1 and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, 2 Defendant Amazon.com Services LLC (“Amazon” or “Defendant”) and Plaintiff Scott Brock 3 (“Plaintiff”) (collectively, “the parties”), by and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate to 4 and petition the court to enter the following Joint Stipulated Protective Order. 5 This Protective Order will provide protection for materials in which the Plaintiff or third 6 parties have a legally cognizable privacy interest, such as confidential business or financial 7 information, information regarding confidential business practices, sensitive information regarding 8 third parties, medical records, employees’ personnel records, or other confidential information 9 otherwise generally unavailable to the public or which may be privileged or otherwise protected 10 from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. The 11 sensitivity and confidentiality of these documents necessitates protection of these documents to be 12 addressed by court order. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt 13 resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information 14 the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable 15 necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their 16 handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such 17 information is justified in this matter. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer 18 blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords 19 from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to 20 confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set 21 forth in Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file 22 confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 141 sets forth the procedures that must be 23 followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file 24 material under seal. 25 2. DEFINITIONS 26 2.1 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of 27 information or items under this Order. 1 2.2 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is 2 generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule of 3 Civil Procedure 26(c). 4 2.3 Counsel (without qualifier): Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well 5 as their support staff). 6 2.4 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that it 7 produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 8 2.5 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium 9 or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, 10 transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses to 11 discovery in this matter. 12 2.6 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to 13 the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a 14 consultant in this action. 15 2.7 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this action. House 16 Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel. 17 2.8 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal 18 entity not named as a Party to this action. 19 2.9 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a party to this action 20 but are retained to represent or advise a party to this action and have appeared in this action on 21 behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on behalf of that party. 22 2.10 Party: any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, 23 consultants, retained experts and investigators, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support 24 staffs). 25 2.11 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery 26 Material in this action. 27 1 2.12 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services 2 (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing, 3 storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors. 4 2.13 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as 5 “CONFIDENTIAL.” 6 2.14 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a 7 Producing Party. 8 3. SCOPE 9 The types of information eligible for protection under this Stipulation and Order include the 10 following: Plaintiff’s medical records; Plaintiff’s personnel records containing information which is 11 private pursuant to Article 1 Section 1 of the California Constitution. Courts have routinely 12 recognized a legally cognizable privacy interest in records of this nature. See e.g., Doe v. A. J. Boggs 13 & Co., No. 118CV01464AWIBAM, 2019 WL 1517567, at *6 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 8, 2019) (citing Pettus 14 v. Cole, 49 Cal. App. 4th 402, 440 (1996)) (ordering discovery of Plaintiffs’ medical information as 15 subject to protective order because “California law recognizes a constitutional right to privacy in an 16 individual’s medical history”); Buchanan v. Santos, No. 1:08-CV-01174-AWI, 2011 WL 2112475, 17 at *5 (E.D. Cal. May 26, 2011) (ordering discovery of personnel records as subject to protective 18 order); Sanchez v. Cty. of Sacramento Sheriff’s Dep’t, No. 2:19-CV-01545 MCE AC, 2020 WL 19 3542328, at *5 (E.D. Cal. June 30, 2020) (ordering discovery of personnel records as subject to 20 protective order). 21 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material (as 22 defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) all 23 copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, 24 conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material.

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

Brock v. Amazon.com Services LLC, (E.D. Cal. 2024).

Brock v. Amazon.com Services LLC (Brock v. Amazon.com Services LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pettus v. Cole
49 Cal. App. 4th 402 (California Court of Appeal, 1996)