Clinical Resource Network v. Medpace, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio
DecidedFebruary 5, 2025
Docket1:23-cv-00239
StatusUnknown

This text of Clinical Resource Network v. Medpace, Inc. (Clinical Resource Network v. Medpace, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Clinical Resource Network v. Medpace, Inc., (S.D. Ohio 2025).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

CLINICAL RESOURCE NETWORK, : LLC d/b/a SYMPHONY CLINICAL : RESEARCH, : Case No. 1:23-cv-00239 : Plaintiff, : Judge Susan D. Dlott : v. : : MEDPACE, INC., : : Defendant. :

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Pursuant to the parties’ joint request that the Court enter this Order, and their agreement that the following limitations and restrictions should apply to documents and information produced for inspection and copying during the course of this litigation (the “Action”), the Court hereby ORDERS that: 1. Scope. This Protective Order (hereinafter “Protective Order” or “Order”) shall apply to all documents or other information produced in the course of discovery in this Action that the producing person or entity (the “Producing Entity”) has designated as “CONFIDENTIAL – SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER” or “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY – SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER” (either a “Confidentiality Designation” or collectively the “Confidentiality Designations”) pursuant to this Order, including but not limited to, all initial disclosures, all responses to discovery requests, all deposition testimony and exhibits, and all materials (including documents or testimony) produced by non-parties in response to subpoenas issued in connection with this matter, including all copies, excerpts, and summaries thereof (collectively the “Confidential Information”). 2. Purpose. The purpose of this Protective Order is to protect against the unnecessary disclosure of Confidential Information. 3. Disclosure Defined. As used herein, “disclosure” or “to disclose” means to divulge, reveal, describe, summarize, paraphrase, quote, transmit, or otherwise communicate Confidential Information, and the restrictions contained herein regarding disclosure of

Confidential Information also apply with equal force to any copies, excerpts, analyses, or summaries of such materials or the information contained therein, as well as to any pleadings, briefs, exhibits, transcripts or other documents which may be prepared in connection with this litigation which contain or refer to the Confidential Information or information contained therein. 4. Designating Material a. Designating Material As Confidential: Any party, or any third party subpoenaed by one of the parties, may designate as Confidential and subject to this Protective Order any documents, testimony, written responses, or other materials produced in this case if they contain information that the Producing Entity asserts in good faith is

protected from disclosure by statute or common law, including, but not limited to, confidential personal information, medical or psychiatric information, trade secrets, personnel records, or such other sensitive commercial information that is not publicly available. Information that is publicly available may not be designated as Confidential. The designation of materials as Confidential pursuant to the terms of this Protective Order does not mean that the document or other material has any status or protection by statute or otherwise except to the extent and for the purposes of this Order. b. Designating Material As Attorneys’ Eyes Only. Any party, or any third party subpoenaed by one of the parties, may designate as Attorneys’ Eyes Only and subject to this Protective Order any materials or information that meet the test set forth in Paragraph 4.a, but as to which the Producing Entity also asserts in good faith that the information is so competitively sensitive that the receipt of the information by parties to the litigation could result in competitive harm to the Producing Entity. 5. Form and Timing Of Designation.

a. Documents And Written Materials. The Producing Entity shall designate any document or other written materials as confidential pursuant to this Order by marking each page of the material with a stamp setting forth the Confidentiality Designation, if practical to do so. The person or entity designating the material shall place the stamp, to the extent possible, in such a manner that it will not interfere with the legibility of the document. Materials shall be so-designated prior to, or at the time of, their production or disclosure. b. Electronically Stored Information (“ESI”): If a production response includes ESI, the Producing Entity shall make an effort to include within the electronic

files themselves the Confidentiality Designation to the extent practicable. If that is not practicable, then the Producing Entity shall designate in a transmittal letter or email to the party to whom the materials are produced (the “Receiving Party”) using a reasonable identifier (e.g., the Bates range) any portions of the ESI that should be treated as “CONFIDENTIAL – SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER,” and any portions of the ESI that should be treated as “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY – SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER.” c. Deposition Testimony. Deposition testimony will be deemed confidential only if designated as such when the deposition is taken or within fourteen (14) days after receipt of the deposition transcript. Such designation must indicate which Confidentiality Designation applies, and must be specific as to the portions of the transcript and/or any exhibits to which that Confidentiality Designation applies, except that any exhibit that was marked with a Confidentiality Designation at the time of production, and which still bears that mark at the time of its use in a deposition, shall be presumed to fall within the

provisions of this Order without further designation. 6. Limitation Of Use. a. General Protections. All information that has received a Confidentiality Designation, including all information derived therefrom, shall be used by any Receiving Party solely for purposes of prosecuting or defending this Action. A Receiving Party shall not use or disclose the Confidential Information for any other purpose, including but not limited to any business, commercial, or competitive purpose. Except as set forth in this Order, a Receiving Party shall not disclose Confidential Information to any third party. This Order shall not prevent the Producing Entity from using or disclosing information it

has designated as Confidential Information, and that belongs to the Producing Entity, for any purpose that the Producing Entity deems appropriate, except that the Producing Entity’s voluntary disclosure of Confidential Information outside the scope of this Action may impact the protection that this Order would otherwise provide with regard to such information, once disclosed. b. Persons To Whom Information Marked “Confidential” May Be Disclosed. Use of any information, documents, or portions of documents marked “CONFIDENTIAL – SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER,” including all information derived therefrom, shall be restricted solely to the following persons who agree to be bound by the terms of this Protective Order, unless additional persons are stipulated by counsel or authorized by the Court: 1. outside counsel of record for the parties, and the administrative staff of outside counsel’s firms;

2. in-house counsel for the parties, and the administrative staff for each in- house counsel;

3. any party to this action who is an individual;

4. as to any party to this action who is not an individual, every employee, director, officer, or manager of that party, but only to the extent necessary to further the interest of the parties in this litigation;

5.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Clinical Resource Network v. Medpace, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clinical-resource-network-v-medpace-inc-ohsd-2025.