|| NEWILSONELSER 2 WILSON ELSER MOSKOWITZ EDELMAN & DICKER LLP CHARLES W. SIMMONS, ESQ. 3 || Nevada Bar No. 6498 ALEXANDRA B. MSLEOD, ESQ. 4 || Nevada Bar No. 8185 BAILEE R. REESE, ESQ. 5 || Nevada Bar No. 16307 6689 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 200 6 Las Vegas, NV 89119 T 702.727.1400 | F 702.727.1401 7 || Charles.Simmons @ wilsonelser.com Alexandra.McLeod@ wilsonelser.com 8 || Bailee.Reese@ wilsonelser.com 9 Attorneys for SF Markets, LLC dba Sprouts Farmers Market UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 11 12 || HELMI EL SENSOUSSL individually, Case No.: 2:25-cv-00600-RFB-MDC 13 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 14 vs. PROTECTIVE ORDER 15 || sp MARKETS, LLC dba Sprouts Farmers Market, a Delaware Corporation; CULTURE FRESH FOODS, 16 INC., a Delaware Corporation; DOES 1-10, inclusive; and ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES 1-10, 17 inclusive, 18 Defendants. 19 The parties to this action, Plaintiff HELMI EL SENSOUSSI, Defendant SF MARKETS, 20 || LLC dba SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET, and Defendant CULTURE FRESH FOODS, INC. 21 (collectively, the "Parties"), by their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and request that the Court 22 || enter a stipulated protective order pursuant as follows: 23 1. The Protective Order shall be entered pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil 24 Procedure. 25 2. The Protective Order shall govern all materials deemed to be "Confidential 26 || Information." Such Confidential Information may include the following: 27 a. Any and all documents referring or related to confidential and proprietary human 28 resources or business information; financial records of the parties; compensation
1 of Defendants’ current or former personnel; policies, procedures and/or training 2 materials of Defendants and/or Defendants’ organizational structure; 3 b. Any documents from the personnel, medical or workers' compensation file of the 4 parties and/or any current or former employee or contractor; 5 c. Any documents relating to the medical and/or health information of the parties 6 and any of Defendants’ current or former employees or contractors; 7 d. Information or documents that may be covered by the attorney-client privilege or 8 attorney work product protection; 9 e. Information or documents the producing party reasonably believes concerns 10 confidential, non-public, proprietary, and/or sensitive information, including but 11 not limit to financial data, intellectual property, information involving privacy 12 interests, and commercially and/or competitively sensitive information; 13 f. Any portions of depositions (audio or video) where Confidential Information is 14 disclosed or used as exhibits. 15 3. In the case of documents and the information contained therein, designation of 16 Confidential Information produced shall be made by (1) identifying said documents as confidential 17 in either parties' FRCP 26(a) disclosures and any supplements made thereto and placing the 18 following legend on the face of the document and each page so designated "CONFIDENTIAL"; or 19 (2) placing the following legend on the face of the document and each page so designated 20 "CONFIDENTIAL". The parties will use their best efforts to limit the number of documents 21 designated Confidential. 22 If either party objects to the claims that information should be deemed Confidential, 23 that party's counsel shall inform opposing counsel in writing within thirty (30) days of the later of: 24 (1) receipt of the Confidential materials or (2) entry of this Protective Order that the information 25 should not be so deemed, and the parties shall attempt first to dispose of such disputes in good faith 26 and on an informal basis. If the parties are unable to resolve their dispute, the party claiming 27 confidentiality shall file a motion to determine if the documents should be protected in order to 1 maintain the confidentiality designation. The information shall continue to have Confidential status 2 during the pendency of any such motion. 3 4. A party seeking to file a confidential document under seal must file a motion to seal 4 and must comply with the Ninth Circuit's directives in Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 5 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006) and Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 6 1097 (9th Cir. 2016). 7 5. The Court has adopted electronic filing procedures. Attorneys must file documents 8 under seal using the Court's electronic filing procedures. See Local Rule IA 10-5. Papers filed with 9 the Court under seal must be accompanied with a concurrently-filed motion for leave to file those 10 documents under seal. See Local Rule IA 10-5(a). 11 6. All motions to seal shall address the standard articulated in Ctr. for Auto Safety and 12 explain why that standard has been met. 809 F.3d at 1097. 13 Specifically, a party seeking to seal judicial records bears the burden of meeting the 14 "compelling reasons" standard, as previously articulated in Kamakana. 447 F.3d 1172. Under the 15 compelling reasons standard, "a court may seal records only when it finds ‘a compelling reason and 16 articulate[s] the factual basis for its ruling, without relying on hypothesis or conjecture.’” Ctr. for 17 Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1097 (quoting Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179). “The court must then 18 ‘conscientiously balance[ ] the competing interests of the public and the party who seeks to keep 19 certain judicial records secret.” Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 15 1097. 20 There is an exception to the compelling reasons standard where a party may satisfy the less 21 exacting "good cause" standard for sealed materials attached to a discovery motion unrelated to the 22 merits of the case. Id. "The good cause language comes from Rule 26(c)(1), which governs the 23 issuance of protective orders in the discovery process: ‘The court may, for good cause, issue an 24 order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or 25 expense.’” Id. (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)). "For good cause to exist, the party seeking protection 26 bears the burden of showing specific prejudice or harm will result if no protective order is granted." 27 Phillips v. General Motors, 307 F.3d 25 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002). 1 deciding which test to apply because the focal consideration is "whether the motion is more than 2 tangentially related to the merits of a case." Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1101. 3 7. The fact that the Court has entered the instant stipulated protective order and that a 4 party has designated a document as confidential pursuant to that protective order does not, standing 5 alone, establish sufficient grounds to seal a filed document. See Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. 6 Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1133 (9th Cir. 2003); see also Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Intl Ins. Co., 966 F.2d 7 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992). 8 8. Confidential Information shall be held in confidence by each qualified recipient to 9 whom it is disclosed, shall be used only for purposes of this action, shall not be used for any business 10 purpose, and shall not be disclosed to any person who is not a qualified recipient. All produced 11 Confidential Information shall be carefully maintained so as to preclude access by persons who are 12 not qualified recipients. 13 9. Qualified recipients shall include only the following: 14 a.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
|| NEWILSONELSER 2 WILSON ELSER MOSKOWITZ EDELMAN & DICKER LLP CHARLES W. SIMMONS, ESQ. 3 || Nevada Bar No. 6498 ALEXANDRA B. MSLEOD, ESQ. 4 || Nevada Bar No. 8185 BAILEE R. REESE, ESQ. 5 || Nevada Bar No. 16307 6689 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 200 6 Las Vegas, NV 89119 T 702.727.1400 | F 702.727.1401 7 || Charles.Simmons @ wilsonelser.com Alexandra.McLeod@ wilsonelser.com 8 || Bailee.Reese@ wilsonelser.com 9 Attorneys for SF Markets, LLC dba Sprouts Farmers Market UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 11 12 || HELMI EL SENSOUSSL individually, Case No.: 2:25-cv-00600-RFB-MDC 13 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 14 vs. PROTECTIVE ORDER 15 || sp MARKETS, LLC dba Sprouts Farmers Market, a Delaware Corporation; CULTURE FRESH FOODS, 16 INC., a Delaware Corporation; DOES 1-10, inclusive; and ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES 1-10, 17 inclusive, 18 Defendants. 19 The parties to this action, Plaintiff HELMI EL SENSOUSSI, Defendant SF MARKETS, 20 || LLC dba SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET, and Defendant CULTURE FRESH FOODS, INC. 21 (collectively, the "Parties"), by their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and request that the Court 22 || enter a stipulated protective order pursuant as follows: 23 1. The Protective Order shall be entered pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil 24 Procedure. 25 2. The Protective Order shall govern all materials deemed to be "Confidential 26 || Information." Such Confidential Information may include the following: 27 a. Any and all documents referring or related to confidential and proprietary human 28 resources or business information; financial records of the parties; compensation
1 of Defendants’ current or former personnel; policies, procedures and/or training 2 materials of Defendants and/or Defendants’ organizational structure; 3 b. Any documents from the personnel, medical or workers' compensation file of the 4 parties and/or any current or former employee or contractor; 5 c. Any documents relating to the medical and/or health information of the parties 6 and any of Defendants’ current or former employees or contractors; 7 d. Information or documents that may be covered by the attorney-client privilege or 8 attorney work product protection; 9 e. Information or documents the producing party reasonably believes concerns 10 confidential, non-public, proprietary, and/or sensitive information, including but 11 not limit to financial data, intellectual property, information involving privacy 12 interests, and commercially and/or competitively sensitive information; 13 f. Any portions of depositions (audio or video) where Confidential Information is 14 disclosed or used as exhibits. 15 3. In the case of documents and the information contained therein, designation of 16 Confidential Information produced shall be made by (1) identifying said documents as confidential 17 in either parties' FRCP 26(a) disclosures and any supplements made thereto and placing the 18 following legend on the face of the document and each page so designated "CONFIDENTIAL"; or 19 (2) placing the following legend on the face of the document and each page so designated 20 "CONFIDENTIAL". The parties will use their best efforts to limit the number of documents 21 designated Confidential. 22 If either party objects to the claims that information should be deemed Confidential, 23 that party's counsel shall inform opposing counsel in writing within thirty (30) days of the later of: 24 (1) receipt of the Confidential materials or (2) entry of this Protective Order that the information 25 should not be so deemed, and the parties shall attempt first to dispose of such disputes in good faith 26 and on an informal basis. If the parties are unable to resolve their dispute, the party claiming 27 confidentiality shall file a motion to determine if the documents should be protected in order to 1 maintain the confidentiality designation. The information shall continue to have Confidential status 2 during the pendency of any such motion. 3 4. A party seeking to file a confidential document under seal must file a motion to seal 4 and must comply with the Ninth Circuit's directives in Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 5 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006) and Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 6 1097 (9th Cir. 2016). 7 5. The Court has adopted electronic filing procedures. Attorneys must file documents 8 under seal using the Court's electronic filing procedures. See Local Rule IA 10-5. Papers filed with 9 the Court under seal must be accompanied with a concurrently-filed motion for leave to file those 10 documents under seal. See Local Rule IA 10-5(a). 11 6. All motions to seal shall address the standard articulated in Ctr. for Auto Safety and 12 explain why that standard has been met. 809 F.3d at 1097. 13 Specifically, a party seeking to seal judicial records bears the burden of meeting the 14 "compelling reasons" standard, as previously articulated in Kamakana. 447 F.3d 1172. Under the 15 compelling reasons standard, "a court may seal records only when it finds ‘a compelling reason and 16 articulate[s] the factual basis for its ruling, without relying on hypothesis or conjecture.’” Ctr. for 17 Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1097 (quoting Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179). “The court must then 18 ‘conscientiously balance[ ] the competing interests of the public and the party who seeks to keep 19 certain judicial records secret.” Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 15 1097. 20 There is an exception to the compelling reasons standard where a party may satisfy the less 21 exacting "good cause" standard for sealed materials attached to a discovery motion unrelated to the 22 merits of the case. Id. "The good cause language comes from Rule 26(c)(1), which governs the 23 issuance of protective orders in the discovery process: ‘The court may, for good cause, issue an 24 order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or 25 expense.’” Id. (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)). "For good cause to exist, the party seeking protection 26 bears the burden of showing specific prejudice or harm will result if no protective order is granted." 27 Phillips v. General Motors, 307 F.3d 25 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002). 1 deciding which test to apply because the focal consideration is "whether the motion is more than 2 tangentially related to the merits of a case." Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1101. 3 7. The fact that the Court has entered the instant stipulated protective order and that a 4 party has designated a document as confidential pursuant to that protective order does not, standing 5 alone, establish sufficient grounds to seal a filed document. See Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. 6 Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1133 (9th Cir. 2003); see also Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Intl Ins. Co., 966 F.2d 7 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992). 8 8. Confidential Information shall be held in confidence by each qualified recipient to 9 whom it is disclosed, shall be used only for purposes of this action, shall not be used for any business 10 purpose, and shall not be disclosed to any person who is not a qualified recipient. All produced 11 Confidential Information shall be carefully maintained so as to preclude access by persons who are 12 not qualified recipients. 13 9. Qualified recipients shall include only the following: 14 a. In-house counsel and law firms for each party and the secretarial, clerical and 15 paralegal staff of each; 16 b. Deposition notaries and staff; 17 c. Persons other than legal counsel who have been retained or specially 18 employed by a party as an expert witness for purposes of this lawsuit or to 19 perform investigative work or fact research; 20 d. Deponents during the course of their depositions or potential witnesses of this 21 case during investigation and/or deposition preparation; and 22 e. The parties to this litigation, their officers and professional employees. 23 10. Each counsel shall be responsible for providing notice of the Protective Order and the 24 terms therein to persons to whom they disclose "Confidential Information," as defined by the terms 25 of the Protective Order. 26 Persons to whom confidential information is shown shall be informed of the terms of this 27 Order and advised that its breach may be punished or sanctioned as contempt of the Court. Such 1 to keep copies of said Confidential materials nor any portion of the deposition transcript reflecting 2 the Confidential Information. 3 11. No copies of Confidential Information shall be made except by or on behalf of 4 attorneys of record, in-house counsel or the parties in this action. Any person making copies of such 5 information shall maintain all copies within their possession or the possession of those entitled to 6 access to such information under the Protective Order. 7 12. Any party that inadvertently discloses or produces in this action a document or 8 information that it considers privileged or otherwise protected from discovery, in whole or in part, 9 shall not be deemed to have waived any applicable privilege or protection by reason of such 10 disclosure or production if, within 14 days of discovering that such document or information has 11 been disclosed or produced, the producing party gives written notice to the receiving party 12 identifying the document or information in question, the asserted privileges or protection, and the 13 grounds there for, with a request that all copies of the document or information be returned or 14 destroyed. The receiving party shall return or destroy the inadvertently disclosed documents upon 15 receipt of appropriately marked replacement documents. 16 13. The termination of this action shall not relieve the parties and persons obligated 17 hereunder from their responsibility to maintain the confidentiality of information designated 18 confidential pursuant to this Order. 19 14. Nothing in this Order shall be construed as an admission to the relevance, authenticity, 20 foundation or admissibility of any document, material, transcript or other information. Nothing in 21 this Order shall constitute a waiver of, or otherwise prejudice a party's right to protect from 22 disclosure any information based on any applicable privilege, right of privacy, trade secret 23 protection, or other statutory or common law immunity. 24 \ \ \ 25 26 \ \ \ 27 1 15. Nothing in the Protective Order shall be deemed to preclude any party from seeking 2 and obtaining, on an appropriate showing, a modification of this Order.
3 IT IS SO STIPULATED: 4 Dated this 30th day of July, 2025. Dated this 30th day of July, 2025. 5 REX LAW WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, 6 EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
7 By: /s/ Cory Rex______________ By: /s/ Bailee R. Reese Charles W. Simmons, Esq. 8 Cory Rex, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 6498 Nevada Bar No. 10577 Alexandra B. McLeod, Esq. 9 170 S. Green Valley Pkwy, Suite 300 Nevada Bar No. 8185 Henderson, Nevada 89119 Bailee R. Reese, Esq. 10 Attorney for Plaintiff Nevada Bar No. 16307 6689 Las Vegas Blvd. South, Suite 200 11 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 Attorneys for Defendant SF Markets, LLC 12 d/b/a Sprouts Farmers Market 13
14 Dated this 30th day of July, 2025.
15 WOLFE & WYMAN, LLP
17 By: /s/ _David T. Blake_________ Rahul Kulkarni, Esq. 18 Nevada Bar No. 10650 David T. Blake, Esq. 19 Nevada Bar No. 11059 6757 Spencer Street 20 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 21 Attorneys for Defendant Culture Fresh Foods, Inc. 22
27 1 Helmi El Sensoussi v. SF Markets, LLC, et al. 2:25-cv-00600-RFB-MDC 2 3 ORDER 4 The terms of the above stipulation for a protective order by and between Plaintiff HELMI 5 || ELSENSOUSSI, and Defendant SF MARKETS, LLC dba SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET, and 6 Defendant CULTURE FRESH FOODS, INC., by their respective counsel, shall hereby be the 7 ORDER of this Court. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. “, 4A - . Aff a 10 DATED this Ist day of August, 2025. ZA emf A Oh fA 11 . . . . if Any discovery disputes, including fo if \ . . fF motions for protective order, must be Hof Maximiliand ef — addressed pursuant to the Court’s Maximilian) - Co vat iil 13 06/12/25 Standing Order (ECF No. ited States Magistraly Judge 10). 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28