Faramarz Naeim v. Robert L. Wilkie

District Court, C.D. California·Decided October 26, 2020·No. 2:19-cv-06126·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 11 FARAMARZ NAEIM, No. CV 2:19-CV-06126 DDP (AFMx) 12 Plaintiff, [PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE 13 v. ORDER1 14 ROBERT L. WILKIE, in his Official Capacity, Secretary, Department of 15 Veterans Affairs; and DOES 1 through 10. 16 Defendants. 17 18 1. A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 19 Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, proprietary 20 or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use 21 for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, 22 the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated 23 Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket 24 protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords 25 from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are 26 entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. 27 1 2 This action is likely to involve private personal information of Plaintiff and third- 3 party employees of Defendant, as well as third-party patients, for which special 4 protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of 5 this action is warranted. Such confidential materials and information consist of, among 6 other things, medical records, medical and personnel records, third-party personnel and 7 employment files, third-party employee personal identifying information, medical 8 records, and information otherwise generally unavailable to the public, or which may be 9 privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court 10 rules, case decisions, or common law. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, 11 to facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, 12 to adequately protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to 13 adequately protect against inadvertent disclosure of privileged information or otherwise 14 protected from disclosure, to ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable necessary 15 uses of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their 16 handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for 17 such information is justified in this matter. It is the intent of the parties that information 18 will not be designated as confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so 19 designated without a good faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, non- 20 public manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of 21 this case. 22 C. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PROCEDURE FOR FILING UNDER SEAL 23 The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this 24 Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under 25 seal; Local Civil Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the 26 standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file 27 material under seal. 1 proceedings and records in civil cases. In connection with non-dispositive motions, good 2 cause must be shown to support a filing under seal. See Kamakana v. City and County of 3 Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006), Phillips v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 4 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002), Makar-Welbon v. Sony Electrics, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 576, 5 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999) (even stipulated protective orders require good cause showing), 6 and a specific showing of good cause or compelling reasons with proper evidentiary 7 support and legal justification, must be made with respect to Protected Material that a 8 party seeks to file under seal. The parties’ mere designation of Disclosure or Discovery 9 Material as CONFIDENTIAL does not—without the submission of competent evidence 10 by declaration, establishing that the material sought to be filed under seal qualifies as 11 confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable—constitute good cause. 12 Further, if a party requests sealing related to a dispositive motion or trial, then 13 compelling reasons, not only good cause, for the sealing must be shown, and the relief 14 sought shall be narrowly tailored to serve the specific interest to be protected. See Pintos 15 v. Pacific Creditors Ass’n., 605 F.3d 665, 677-79 (9th Cir. 2010). For each item or type 16 of information, document, or thing sought to be filed or introduced under seal in 17 connection with a dispositive motion or trial, the party seeking protection must articulate 18 compelling reasons, supported by specific facts and legal justification, for the requested 19 sealing order. Again, competent evidence supporting the application to file documents 20 under seal must be provided by declaration. 21 Any document that is not confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable in its 22 entirety will not be filed under seal if the confidential portions can be redacted. If 23 documents can be redacted, then a redacted version for public viewing, omitting only the 24 confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable portions of the document, shall be filed. 25 Any application that seeks to file documents under seal in their entirety should include 26 an explanation of why redaction is not feasible. 27 2. DEFINITIONS 1 et al., No. CV-19-06126-DDP-AFM. 2 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of 3 information or items under this Order. 4 2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how 5 it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under 6 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in the Good Cause 7 Statement. 8 2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as their 9 support staff). 10 2.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or 11 items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 12 2.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of 13 the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among 14 other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated 15 in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. 16 2.7 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter 17 pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an 18 expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 19 2.8 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action. 20 House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside 21 counsel. 22 2.9 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association or 23 other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. 24 2.10 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a party to 25 this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this Action and have 26 appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm that has 27 appeared on behalf of that party, and includes support staff. 1 employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their 2 support staffs). 3 2.12 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or 4 Discovery Material in this Action.

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

Faramarz Naeim v. Robert L. Wilkie, (C.D. Cal. 2020).

Faramarz Naeim v. Robert L. Wilkie (Faramarz Naeim v. Robert L. Wilkie) — 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)
Burrell v. Hampshire County
307 F.3d 1 (First Circuit, 2002)
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)