Estate of John Grigorian, by and through successor in interest, Blake Grigorian; Blake Grigorian, individually v. County of Los Angeles, a public entity, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department; Sheriff Robert G. Luna, in his individual and official capacities; Morees Valdez, an individual, and Does 1 through 10, individually, jointly and severally

District Court, C.D. California·Decided October 20, 2025·No. 2:25-cv-03301·Unknown

Opinion

! || Denisse O. Gastélum, SBN 282771 Christian Contreras, SBN 330269 Selene Estrada-Villela, SBN 354994 LAW OFFICES OF CHRISTIAN CONTRERA‘ GASTELUM LAW, APC PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 360 E. 2nd St., 8th Floor 3767 Worsham Ave. Los Angeles. California 90012 Long Beach, California 90808 Tel: (323) 435-8000 Tel: (213) 340-6112 Fax: (G23) 597-0101 Fax: G1 3) 402-8622 Email: CC@Contreras-Law.com Email: dgastelum@gastelumfirm.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs, ESTATE OF JOHN GRIGORIAN, by and through successor in interest, BLAKE g || GRIGORIAN; BLAKE GRIGORIAN, individually 1] ESTATE OF JOHN GRIGORIAN, by ) CASE NO. 2:25-cv—03301-MWF-AGR } and through successor in interest, [Assigned to the Hon. Michael W. BLAKE GRIGORIAN; BLAKE itzgerald, District Judge; Referred to the GRIGORIAN, individually Hon. Alicia G. Rosenberg, Magistrate Judge] Plaintiffs, STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER V. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, a public entity, LOS ANGELES OUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; SHERIFF ROBERT G. LUNA, in his individual and official capacities; MOREES VALDEZ, an individual, and DOES 1 through 10, individually, jointly and severally, Defendants.

1. A.PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS Discovery in this action is 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 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to a file confidential " information under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be "2 followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal. Is Plaintiffs and Defendants may produce certain documents in this case that contain or relate to personal information, medical information, investigation records, law enforcement safety objectives,or financial information. Such information may implicate the privacy interests of the party and are properly protected through a Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) protective order. Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart, 467 U.S. 20, 35 n.21 (1984) (“Rule 26(c) includes among its express purposes the protection of a ‘party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression or undue burden or expense.’ 97 Although the Rule contains no specific reference to privacy or to other rights or 93 interests that may be implicated, such matters are implicit in the broad purpose and 74 language of the Rule.”); Soto v. City of Concord, 162 F.R.D. 603, 617 (N.D. Cal. 95 1995) (a party’s privacy rights are to be protected through a “carefully crafted protective order.”). 2. DEFINITIONS

2.1 Action: This pending federal law suit, Estate of John Grigorian et al. v.

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

Estate of John Grigorian, by and through successor in interest, Blake Grigorian; Blake Grigorian, individually v. County of Los Angeles, a public entity, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department; Sheriff Robert G. Luna, in his individual and official capacities; Morees Valdez, an individual, and Does 1 through 10, individually, jointly and severally, (C.D. Cal. 2025).

Estate of John Grigorian, by and through successor in interest, Blake Grigorian; Blake Grigorian, individually v. County of Los Angeles, a public entity, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department; Sheriff Robert G. Luna, in his individual and official capacities; Morees Valdez, an individual, and Does 1 through 10, individually, jointly and severally (Estate of John Grigorian, by and through successor in interest, Blake Grigorian; Blake Grigorian, individually v. County of Los Angeles, a public entity, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department; Sheriff Robert G. Luna, in his individual and official capacities; Morees Valdez, an individual, and Does 1 through 10, individually, jointly and severally) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart
467 U.S. 20 (Supreme Court, 1984)
Soto v. City of Concord
162 F.R.D. 603 (N.D. California, 1995)