Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. California Air Resources Board

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedAugust 12, 2025
Docket2:24-cv-00801
StatusUnknown

This text of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. California Air Resources Board (Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. California Air Resources Board) 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
Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. California Air Resources Board, (C.D. Cal. 2025).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 WESTERN DIVISION 9 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF Case No. 2:24-cv-00801-ODW-PVCx 10 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CALIFORNIA STIPULATED AND PROTECTIVE 11 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, ORDER AMERICAN FARM BUREAU 12 FEDERATION, LOS ANGELES 13 COUNTY BUSINESS FEDERATION, CENTRAL VALLEY BUSINESS 14 FEDERATION, and WESTERN GROWERS ASSOCIATION, 15 Plaintiffs, 16 v. 17 LIANE M. RANDOLPH, in her official 18 capacity as Chair of the California Air Resources Board, STEVEN S. CLIFF, 19 in his official capacity as the Executive 20 Officer of the California Air Resources Board, and ROBERT A. BONTA, in 21 his official capacity as Attorney General of California 22 Defendants. 23 24 1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 25 Discovery in this action may involve production of confidential, proprietary 26 or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from 27 1 use for any purpose other than pursuing this litigation may be warranted. 2 Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the 3 following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does 4 5 not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that 6 the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited 7 information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable 8 legal principles. 9 2. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT 10 This action may involve trade secrets, customer lists and other valuable 11 12 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 the prosecution, defense, and/or settlement of this action is 15 warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials and information consist of, 16 among other things, confidential business or financial information, information 17 regarding confidential business practices, or other confidential research, 18 19 development, or commercial information (including information implicating privacy 20 rights of third parties), information otherwise generally unavailable to the public, or 21 which may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under state or 22 federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. 23 Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt 24 resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately 25 26 protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the 27 parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in this action, 1 including but not limited to in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address 2 their handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective 3 order for such information is justified in this matter. It is the intent of the parties that 4 5 information will not be designated as confidential for tactical reasons and that 6 nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it has been maintained in a 7 confidential, non-public manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part 8 of the public record of this case. 9 3. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF UNDER SEAL FILING PROCEDURE 10 The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 14.3, below, that this 11 12 Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information 13 under seal; Local Civil Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed 14 and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court 15 to file material under seal. There is a strong presumption that the public has a right 16 of access to judicial proceedings and records in civil cases. In connection with non- 17 dispositive motions, good cause must be shown to support a filing under seal. See 18 19 Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006), 20 Phillips v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002), Makar- 21 Welbon v. Sony Electrics, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 576, 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999) (even 22 stipulated protective orders require good cause showing), and a specific showing of 23 good cause or compelling reasons with proper evidentiary support and legal 24 justification, must be made with respect to Protected Material that a party seeks to 25 26 file under seal. The parties’ mere designation of Disclosure or Discovery Material 27 as CONFIDENTIAL does not—without the submission of competent evidence by 1 declaration, establishing that the material sought to be filed under seal qualifies as 2 confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable—constitute good cause. 3 Further, if a party requests sealing related to a dispositive motion or trial, then 4 5 compelling reasons, not only good cause, for the sealing must be shown, and the 6 relief sought shall be narrowly tailored to serve the specific interest to be protected. 7 See Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass’n., 605 F.3d 665, 677-79 (9th Cir. 2010). For 8 each item or type of information, document, or thing sought to be filed or introduced 9 under seal, the party seeking protection must articulate compelling reasons, 10 supported by specific facts and legal justification, for the requested sealing order. 11 12 Again, competent evidence supporting the application to file documents under seal 13 must be provided by declaration. 14 Any document that is not confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable in 15 its entirety will not be filed under seal if the confidential portions can be redacted. If 16 documents can be redacted, then a redacted version for public viewing, omitting only 17 the confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable portions of the document, shall 18 19 be filed. Any application that seeks to file documents under seal in their entirety 20 should include an explanation of why redaction is not feasible. 21 4. DEFINITIONS 22 4.1 Action: the above-captioned pending federal lawsuit. 23 4.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation 24 of information or items under this Order. 25 26 4.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of 27 how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for 1 protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in 2 the Good Cause Statement. 3 4.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as 4 5 their support staff). 6 4.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or 7 items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as 8 “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES 9 ONLY.” 10 4.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless 11 12 of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, 13 among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced 14 or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery. 15 4.7 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter 16 pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as 17 an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 18 19 4.8 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY 20 Information or Items: Protected Material the disclosure of which to another Party 21 or Non-Party would create a substantial risk of serious harm that could not be 22 avoided by less restrictive means. 23 4.9 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action.

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

Related

Pintos v. PACIFIC CREDITORS ASS'N
605 F.3d 665 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Knight v. Spencer
447 F.3d 6 (First Circuit, 2006)
Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu
447 F.3d 1172 (Ninth Circuit, 2006)
Makar-Wellbon v. Sony Electronics, Inc.
187 F.R.D. 576 (E.D. Wisconsin, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. California Air Resources Board, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chamber-of-commerce-of-the-united-states-of-america-v-california-air-cacd-2025.