Eden Environmental Citizen's Group, LLC v. California Cascade Building Materials, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California·Decided May 21, 2020·No. 2:19-cv-01936·Unknown

Opinion

Kent J. Schmidt (SBN 195969) schmidt.kent@dorsey.com 600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 2000 Costa Mesa, CA 92626-7655 Telephone: (714) 800-1400 Facsimile: (714) 800-1499

M. Benjamin Machlis (admitted pro hac vice) machlis.ben@dorsey.com Megan Houdeshel (admitted pro hac vice) houdeshel.megan@dorsey.com 111 S. Main Street, 21st Floor Salt Lake City, UT 84111-2176 Telephone: (801) 933-7360 Facsimile: (801) 933-7373 Attorneys for Defendants California Cascade Building Materials, Inc., Amar S. Doman and James Code EDEN ENVIRONMENTAL CITIZEN’S CASE NO: 2:19-cv-01936 TLN KJN GROUP, LLC, a California limited liability company, STIPULATION REGARDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Plaintiff, v. MATERIALS, INC., a Delaware corporation; AMAR S. DOMAN, an individual; and JAMES CODE, an individual, Defendants.

Pursuant to L.R. 141.1, California Cascade Building Materials, Inc. and Eden Environmental Citizen’s Group, LLC (“PARTIES”) hereby submit a proposed stipulated protective order for the Court’s consideration and approval. (1) Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to 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, the PARTIES hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The PARTIES acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The PARTIES further acknowledge, as set forth in Section G, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal. (2) This case involves proprietary business information and other sensitive commercial, financial, technical, and/or proprietary information (“MATERIAL”) for which special protection from public disclosure, disclosure to the other Party, and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential and proprietary MATERIAL consists of, among other things, confidential business or financial information, information regarding confidential business practices, or other confidential information (including 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 or attorneys’ eyes only for tactical reasons and that nothing 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) The PARTIES, by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and agree that any MATERIAL deemed by any Party or by any person or entity that is not a party to this action (“THIRD-PARTY”) to be confidential, proprietary, trade secret and/or subject to a right of privacy (“CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION”), shall be designated and protected according to the following terms and conditions: (3) Any Party or THIRD-PARTY may determine in good faith whether any MATERIAL should be designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” (“DESIGNATING PARTY”). However, such good faith belief must be based on the fact that such information has not been made public and the DESIGNATING PARTY must have a good faith belief that if such information is disclosed it will have the effect of causing harm to a Party’s competitive position or otherwise impinge upon a Party’s right to privacy. PARTIES and THIRD-PARTIES shall also have the right to designate as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” MATERIAL produced, served or provided by other PARTIES or THIRD-PARTIES, in which case the DESIGNATING PARTY shall notify the other PARTIES and/or THIRD-PARTIES of the MATERIAL that should be treated as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” pursuant to this Stipulated Protective Order. Any MATERIAL, or any part thereof, designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” shall be used only for the preparation and trial of this action, including discovery, pre-trial proceedings, trial, appellate proceedings and petitions for reconsideration and/or review, and shall not be used for any business, commercial or other purpose. Except as otherwise provided in this Stipulated Protective Order, or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, any MATERIAL that a Party or THIRD-PARTY deems “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” must be clearly so designated. Designation in conformity with this Stipulated Protective Order requires the following: a. For MATERIAL in documentary form (apart from transcripts of depositions or other pretrial or trial proceedings), the DESIGNATING PARTY producing the documents shall affix the legend “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” at the top or bottom or by watermarking of each page of a document that contains CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. The DESIGNATING PARTY that makes original documents available for inspection need not designate them for protection under this Stipulated Protective Order until after the inspecting Party has indicated which documents it would like copied and produced. During the inspection and before the designation, all of the documents made available for inspection shall be deemed “CONFIDENTIAL- ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” After the inspecting Party has identified the documents it wants copied and produced, the DESIGNATING PARTY must determine which documents qualify for protection under this Stipulated Protective Order; then, before producing the specified documents, the producing Party must affix the legend “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” to each page of the documents that contain CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. If, after production, a Party or THIRD-PARTY designates as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” documents not previously designated, then any Party in possession of such documents shall designate the documents as such in accordance with this Stipulated Protective Order. b. For testimony given in deposition or in other pretrial or trial proceedings, the DESIGNATING PARTY shall identify either (a) on the record before the close of the deposition, hearing or other proceeding, or (b) within 20 days after receiving the transcript of such deposition, hearing or other proceeding, all portions of the testimony that it wants to designate as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” Only those portions of the testimony that are designated for protection during the deposition or other pretrial or trial proceedings, or within the 20 days after receipt of the transcript of such testimony, shall be covered by the provisions of this Stipulated Protective Order. The court reporter shall affix to the top or bottom of each page of a transcript containing CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION the legend “CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” as instructed by a DESIGNATING PARTY’s instructions. c. For any MATER

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

Eden Environmental Citizen's Group, LLC v. California Cascade Building Materials, Inc., (E.D. Cal. 2020).

Eden Environmental Citizen's Group, LLC v. California Cascade Building Materials, Inc. (Eden Environmental Citizen's Group, LLC v. California Cascade Building Materials, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Phillips v. General Motors Corporation
307 F.3d 1206 (Ninth Circuit, 2002)