California Spine And Neurosurgery Institute v. Flo Services USA

District Court, C.D. California·Decided March 20, 2024·No. 2:23-cv-07473·Unknown

Opinion

COURTNEY CULWELL HILL (SBN: 210143) cchill@grsm.com SHANNON L. ERNSTER (SBN: 264940) sernster@grsm.com HELA VAKNIN (SBN: 342083) hvaknin@grsm.com 633 West Fifth Street, 52nd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 576-5000 Facsimile: (213) 680-4470 Attorneys for Defendant AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY JONATHAN A. STIEGLITZ (SBN 278028) Jonathan@stieglitzlaw.com JONATHAN A. STIEGLITZ 11845 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 800 Los Angeles, California 90064 Telephone: (323) 979-2063 Facsimile: (323) 488-6748 Attorney for Plaintiff CALIFORNIA SPINE AND CALIFORNIA SPINE AND ) CASE NO. 2:23-cv-07473 FLA (AJRx) NEUROSURGERY INSTITUTE, ) Judge: Mónica Ramírez Almadani ) Magistrate Judge: A. Joel Richlin PLAINTIFF, ) ) VS. [PROPOSED] STIPULATED ) PROTECTIVE ORDER ) INSURANCE COMPANY, AND ) DOES 1-10, ) ) ) 1. GENERAL 1.1 Purposes and Limitations. Discovery in this action will 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 litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, Plaintiff California Spine and Neurosurgery Institute (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Aetna Life Insurance Company (“Aetna”) (Plaintiff and Aetna are collectively referred to herein as “the Parties”) hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. This Protective Order shall govern any record of information produced in this action and designated pursuant to this Protective Order, including all designated deposition testimony, all designated testimony taken at a hearing or other proceeding, all designated deposition exhibits, interrogatory answers, admissions, documents and other discovery materials, whether produced informally or in response to interrogatories, requests for admissions, requests for production of documents or other formal methods of discovery. This Protective Order shall also govern any designated record of information produced in this action pursuant to required disclosures under any federal procedural rule or local rule of the Court and any supplementary disclosures thereto. This Protective Order shall apply to the Parties and to any nonparty from whom discovery may be sought who desires the protection of this Protective Order. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 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. / / / / / / 1.2 Good Cause Statement. This action arises out of a dispute between Plaintiff and Defendant regarding payment for medical services rendered by Plaintiff to a single patient (“Patient”) enrolled in a health care plan insured and administered by Defendant. Discovery in this action will involve the disclosure of private information of the Patient, including personal health information and information regarding the medical services provided, trade secrets, and other valuable commercial, financial, technical and/or proprietary information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials and information includes, among other things, confidential business or financial information, information regarding confidential business practices, 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 reasonable 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 will 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 of this case. / / / / / / / / / 2. DEFINITIONS 2.1 Action: California Spine and Neurosurgery Institute v. Flo Services USA, et al., Central District of California, Case No. 2:23-cv-07473 FLA (AJRx). 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of information or items under this Order. 2.3 “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. The term Confidential Information shall include confidential or proprietary technical, scientific, financial, business, health, or medical information designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” by the producing party. The term “Confidential Health Information” shall constitute a subset of Confidential Information, and shall be designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” and subject to all other terms and conditions governing the treatment of Confidential Information. Confidential Health Information shall mean information supplied in any form, or any portion thereof, that identifies an individual or subscriber in any manner and relates to the past, present, or future care, services, or supplies relating to the physical or mental health or condition of such individual or subscriber, the provision of health care to such individual or subscriber, or the past, present, or future payment for the provision of health care to such individual or subscriber. Confidential Health Information shall include, but is not limited to, claim data, claim forms, grievances, appeals, or other documents or records that contain any patient health information required to be kept confidential under any state or federal law, including 45 C.F.R. Parts 160 and 164 promulgated pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (see 45 C.F.R. §§ 164.501 & 160.103), and the following subscriber, patient, or member identifiers: a. names; b. all geographic subdivisions smaller than a State, including street address, city, county, precinct, and zip code; c. all elements of dates (except year) for dates directly related to an individual, including birth date, admission date, discharge date, age, and date of death; d. telephone numbers; e. fax numbers; f. electronic mail addresses; g. social security numbers; h. medical record numbers; i. health plan beneficiary numbers; j. account numbers; k. certificate/license numbers; l. vehicle identifiers and serial numbers, including license plate numbers; m. device identifiers and serial numbers; n. web universal resource locators (“URLs”); o. internet protocol (“IP”) address numbers; p. biometric identifiers, including finger and voice prints; q. full face photographic images and any comparable images; and/or r. any other unique identifying number, characteristic, or code. 2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as their support staff). 2.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that

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

California Spine And Neurosurgery Institute v. Flo Services USA, (C.D. Cal. 2024).

California Spine And Neurosurgery Institute v. Flo Services USA (California Spine And Neurosurgery Institute v. Flo Services USA) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Warren v. Steer
5 A. 4 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1886)