Custer v. C R Bard Incorporated

CourtDistrict Court, D. Nevada
DecidedMay 26, 2020
Docket3:20-cv-00302
StatusUnknown

This text of Custer v. C R Bard Incorporated (Custer v. C R Bard Incorporated) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Custer v. C R Bard Incorporated, (D. Nev. 2020).

Opinion

1 |} ERIC W. SWANIS, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 6840 2 || GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 3 10845 Griffith Peak Drive, Suite 600 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 A || Telephone: (702) 792-3773 Facsimile: (702) 792-9002 5 || Email: swanise @ gtlaw.com 6 Counsel for Defendants 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA 9 || GEORGE CUSTER, CASE NO. 3:20-cv-00302-MMD-WGC 10 Plaintiff, 11 V. 12 C. R. BARD, INC.; BARD PERIPHERAL 13 || VASCULAR, INCORPORATED, Defendants. 15 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 17 The Parties, through their respective counsel, stipulate to the entry of a protective orde 18 |/to govern the dissemination of documents, materials, and other information, including th 19 || substance and content thereof, designated by any party as confidential and produced by an 20 || party in support of motions, in response to written discovery, or during any formal or inform: 21 || discovery in this litigation subject to the terms as set forth below. 22 WHEREAS, the parties to this action, through their respective counsel, have agree 23 that a protective order preserving the confidentiality of certain documents and informatio 24 || should be entered by the Court. 25 26 27 W/// 28

1 THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 2 I. Definitions 3 1. Confidential Information. “Confidential Information” is defined herein as 4 any information that constitutes, reflects, discloses, or contains: (1) a “trade secret or other 5 confidential research, development, or commercial information” that is suitable for protection 6 under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1)(G); and (2) information that may be protected 7 from disclosure under a party’s constitutional right of privacy such as confidential and private 8 psychiatric, psychological, medical condition and/or employment information. 9 2. Trade Secret. A party, in designating information “Confidential” because it 10 contains a “Trade Secret,” shall designate only information that meets the definition of trade 11 secret contained in 18 U.S.C. § 1839: 12 the term “trade secret” means all forms and types of financial, business, scientific, technical, economic, or engineering 13 information, including patterns, plans, compilations, program 14 devices, formulas, designs, prototypes, methods, techniques, processes, procedures, programs, or codes, whether tangible or 15 intangible, and whether or how stored, compiled, or memorialized 16 physically, electronically, graphically, photographically, or in writing if – 17 (A) the owner thereof has taken reasonable 18 measures to keep such information secret; and 19 (B) the information derives independent 20 economic value, actual or potential, from not being 21 generally known to, and not being readily a scertainable through proper means by, the public. 22 23 3. This Action. “This Action” means George Custer v. C. R. Bard, Inc., et al., 24 Case No. 2:20-cv-00601-APG-BNW, pending in the United States District Court District of 25 Nevada. 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / 1 II. Information Within the Scope of the Protective Order 2 4. This Protective Order shall govern all hard copy and electronic materials, the 3 information contained therein, and all other information produced or disclosed during This 4 Action, including all copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations thereof, whether revealed 5 in a document, deposition, other testimony, discovery response or otherwise, by any party to 6 This Action or its representatives (the “Supplying Party”) to any other party or parties to This 7 Action or their representatives (the “Receiving Party”), whether provided voluntarily, 8 pursuant to formal discovery procedures, or otherwise. The Parties agree that confidentiality 9 of materials at trial will be determined by the Court after a separate briefing and/or argument 10 process. 11 5. The scope of confidentiality protections afforded under this Protective Order 12 does not include any trial exhibits or trial testimony entered into evidence during the case 13 known as Phillips v. C. R. Bard, Inc., et al., No. 3:12-cv-00344-RCJ-WGC (D. Nev. June 1, 14 2015), as to which that Court entered an Order denying Bard’s motion to seal trial exhibits 15 and trial transcripts. 16 In addition, this Protective Order does not apply to any document that was admitted 17 into evidence during the three MDL Bard IVC filter bellwether cases In Re: Bard IVC Filters 18 Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2641, listed in the MDL Court’s Suggestion of Remand 19 and Transfer Order (Second), Dkt. No. 3 (Exhibit 2 – Admitted Exhibit List from Bellwether 20 Trials and Documents No Longer Subject to Protective Order). To the extent only a portion 21 of a document was admitted, only that portion of the document that was admitted shall not be 22 subject to protection. 23 Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Protective Order does not address or alter whether 24 or not Defendants may argue that non-confidential documents should still be entitled to 25 protection under the work-product doctrine and/or the attorney-client communication 26 privilege. 27 / / / 28 / / / 1 III. Designating Information As “Confidential” Pursuant to This Protective Order 2 6. Documents. Any Supplying Party producing documents that contain 3 information that meets the definition of Confidential Information as provided in Paragraphs 1 4 and 2 herein, may designate the contents of the documents as “Confidential” prior to or at the 5 time of production by placing the following designation on the documents: 6 “CONFIDENTIAL – Subject to Protective Order.” Where a document consists of more than 7 one page, each page of the document shall be designated as such. Any document or 8 information for which it is impracticable or impossible to affix such a legend may be 9 designated by written notice to that effect with a reasonable description of the material in 10 question including a BATES number, where applicable. 11 7. Inspection. If a Supplying Party makes documents or information available for 12 inspection, rather than delivering copies to another party, no “Confidential” designation is 13 required in advance of the initial inspection. For the purposes of initial inspection only, the 14 documents shall be considered “CONFIDENTIAL.” Upon production of the inspected 15 documents, the Supplying Party shall designate which of the produced or copied documents 16 and materials are or contain Confidential Information pursuant to Paragraph 6 of this Order. 17 8. Written Discovery. If responses to written discovery contain Confidential 18 Information as defined in Paragraph 1 and 2 of this Protective Order, the Responding Party 19 may designate the responsive documents and information, as set forth in Paragraph 6, with 20 specific indication of the page and line references of the material that is “Confidential” under 21 the terms of this Protective Order. 22 9. Depositions. The parties may designate as Confidential any deposition 23 transcript, or portions thereof, in This Action that meets the definition of Confidential 24 Information provided in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Protective Order. Counsel for the 25 designating party shall advise the court reporter and the parties on the record during the 26 deposition or by letter no later than thirty (30) calendar days after the court reporter provides 27 the parties with the final deposition transcript.

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

Related

Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu
447 F.3d 1172 (Ninth Circuit, 2006)
Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC
809 F.3d 1092 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Custer v. C R Bard Incorporated, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/custer-v-c-r-bard-incorporated-nvd-2020.