Darren Clevenger v. Welch Foods, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California·Decided February 19, 2021·No. 8:20-cv-01859·Unknown

Opinion

7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SOUTHERN DIVISION 11 DARREN CLEVENGER and DAVID CASE NO. 8:20-cv-01859-CJC-JDEx BLOOM on behalf of himself and all 12 others similarly situated, Hon. Cormac J. Carney, Judge Presiding 13 Plaintiffs,

14 v. STIPULATED PROTECTIVE 15 WELCH FOODS INC., A ORDER COOPERATIVE, THE PROMOTION 16 IN MOTION COMPANIES, INC., a Delaware Corporation, and DOES 1 17 through 25, inclusive,

18 Defendants. 19 20 Based on the parties’ Stipulation (Dkt. 45) and the Court’s independent 21 review and edit, for good cause shown, the Court finds and orders as follows. 22 I. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 23 Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, 24 proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public 25 disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting or defending this 26 litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and 27 petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties 1 or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure 2 and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to 3 confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties further 4 acknowledge that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file 5 confidential information under seal; Local Civil Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures 6 that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks 7 permission from the Court to file material under seal. 8 There is a strong presumption that the public has a right of access to judicial 9 proceedings and records in civil cases. In connection with non-dispositive motions, 10 good cause must be shown to support a filing under seal. See Kamakana v. City 11 and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006), Phillips v. Gen. 12 Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002), Makar-Welbon v. Sony 13 Electrics, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 576, 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999) (even stipulated protective 14 orders require good cause showing), and a specific showing of good cause or 15 compelling reasons with proper evidentiary support and legal justification, must be 16 made with respect to any material that a party seeks to file under seal. The parties’ 17 mere designation of material as covered by this Order does not—without the 18 submission of competent evidence establishing that the material sought to be filed 19 under seal qualifies as confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable— 20 constitute good cause. 21 Further, if a party requests sealing related to a dispositive motion or trial, 22 then compelling reasons, not only good cause, for the sealing must be shown, and 23 the relief sought shall be narrowly tailored to serve the specific interest to be 24 protected. See Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass’n., 605 F.3d 665, 677-79 (9th Cir. 25 2010). For each item or type of information, document, or thing sought to be filed 26 or introduced under seal, the party seeking protection must articulate compelling 27 reasons, supported by specific facts and legal justification, for the requested sealing 1 order. Again, competent evidence supporting the application to file documents 2 under seal must be provided by declaration. 3 Any document that is not confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable 4 in its entirety will not be filed under seal if the confidential portions can be 5 redacted. If documents can be redacted, then a redacted version for public viewing, 6 omitting only the confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable portions of the 7 document, shall be filed. Any application that seeks to file documents under seal in 8 their entirety should include an explanation of why redaction is not feasible. 9 II. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT 10 This action is likely to involve trade secrets and other valuable research, 11 development, commercial, financial, technical and/or proprietary information for 12 which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other 13 than prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential and proprietary 14 materials and information consist of, among other things, confidential business or 15 financial information, information regarding confidential business practices, or 16 other confidential research, development, or commercial information (including 17 information implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise 18 generally unavailable to the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise 19 protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, 20 or common law. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the 21 prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to 22 adequately protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to 23 ensure that the parties are permitted necessary uses of such material in preparation 24 for trial, to address their handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends of 25 justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this matter. It is the 26 intent of the parties that information will not be designated as confidential for 27 tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it 1 has been maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and there is good cause 2 why it should not be part of the public record of this case. 3 III. DEFINITIONS 4 A. Action: Case No. SACV20-cv-01859-CJC (JDEx) 5 B. Challenging Party: A Party or Non-Party that challenges the 6 designation of information or items under this Order. 7 C. "CONFIDENTIAL" Information or Items: Information (regardless of 8 how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for 9 protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified 10 above in the Good Cause Statement. 11 D. Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as 12 their support staff). 13 E. Designating Party: A Party or Non-Party that designates information 14 or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as 15 "CONFIDENTIAL" or "HEIGHTENED CONFIDENTIAL." 16 F. Disclosure or Discovery Material: All items or information, 17 regardless of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or 18 maintained (including, among other things, testimony, transcripts, and 19 tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses 20 to discovery in this matter. 21 G. Expert: A person with specialized knowledge or experience in a 22 matter pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its 23 Counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 24 H. “HEIGHTENED CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: 25 CONFIDENTIAL pricing and manufacturing cost information that may 26 be shown to or read by Plaintiffs, but which Plaintiffs’ counsel may not 27 give copies to Plaintiffs either by email, mail or in person. 1 I. House Counsel: Attorneys who are employees of a Party to this 2 Action. House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any 3 other outside counsel. 4 J. Non-Party: Any natural person, partnership, corporation, 5 association, or other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. 6 K.

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

Darren Clevenger v. Welch Foods, Inc., (C.D. Cal. 2021).

Darren Clevenger v. Welch Foods, Inc. (Darren Clevenger v. Welch Foods, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pintos v. PACIFIC CREDITORS ASS'N
605 F.3d 665 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
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)