Farley v. Lincoln Benefit Life Co.

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. California
DecidedFebruary 4, 2022
Docket2:20-cv-02485
StatusUnknown

This text of Farley v. Lincoln Benefit Life Co. (Farley v. Lincoln Benefit Life Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Farley v. Lincoln Benefit Life Co., (E.D. Cal. 2022).

Opinion

1 NICHOLAS & TOMASEVIC, LLP FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP Craig M. Nicholas (SBN 178444) Tarifa B. Laddon (SBN 240419) 2 cnicholas@nicholaslaw.org tarifa.laddon@faegredrinker.com Alex Tomasevic (SBN 245598) 1800 Century Park East, Suite 1500 3 atomasevic@nicholaslaw Los Angeles, California 90067 225 Broadway, 19th Floor Telephone: 310-203-4000 4 San Diego, California 92101 Telephone: 619-325-0492 Katherine Villanueva (pro hac vice) 5 kate.villanueva@faegredrinker.com WINTERS & ASSOCIATES One Logan Square, Suite 2000 6 Jack B. Winters, Jr. (SBN 82998) Philadelphia, PA 19103 jackbwinters@earthlink.net Telephone: 215-988-2700 7 Georg M. Capielo (SBN 245491) 8 gcapielo@einsurelaw.com K krr ii ss tt ee nn . rR eie li ll yl @y ( fp ar eo g rh ea dc r iv ni kc ee r) . com Sarah Ball (SBN 292337) 1500 K Street, N.W., Suite 1100 9 sball@einsurelaw.com Washington, DC 20005 8489 La Mesa Boulevard Telephone: 202-230-5000 10 La Mesa, California 91942 Telephone: 619-234-9000 Attorneys for Defendant 11 LINCOLN BENEFIT LIFE COMPANY Attorneys for Plaintiff 12 DEANA FARLEY 13

14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16 DEANA FARLEY, Individually, and on No. 2:20-cv-2485 KJM DB Behalf of the Class, 17 Plaintiff, 18 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER v. GOVERNING THE PRODUCTION AND 19 EXCHANGE OF CONFIDENTIAL LINCOLN BENEFIT LIFE COMPANY, a INFORMATION 20 Nebraska Corporation. 21 Defendant. 22

24 25 26 27 28 1 1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 2 Disclosure and discovery in the above-captioned action are likely to involve production of 3 confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure 4 and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, 5 the Parties hereby stipulate to and petition the court to enter the following Stipulated Protective 6 Order (“Order”). The Parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on all 7 disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and 8 use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under 9 the applicable legal principles. The Parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, 10 that this Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal or with redactions; 11 Civil Local Rules 140 (redaction) and 141 (sealing) sets forth the procedures that must be followed 12 and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the Court to file redacted 13 material or material under seal. 14 1.1. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT 15 In the course of litigating and taking discovery in the action, the Parties, or Non-Parties in 16 connection with the action, may need to produce competitively sensitive, confidential, and 17 proprietary business information and/or private personal, medical, or financial information, 18 including the following categories: 19 (a) commercially sensitive and proprietary internal, financial or actuarial 20 material; 21 (b) non-public personal identifying information (including, addresses, social 22 security numbers and dates of birth), and health and financial information relating to the policy or 23 policies at issue in this action, the disclosure of which would potentially violate state and federal 24 privacy laws, including but not limited to the California Insurance Information and Privacy 25 Protection Act, Cal. Ins. Code § 791, et seq., the California Financial Information Protection Act, 26 Cal. Fin. Code § 4050, et seq., and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, 15 U.S.C. 6801, et seq. 27 (c) documents that reveal confidential financial information about a party’s 28 business or commercial information about a party’s business that is not available to 1 the public or its competitors, which if disclosed could place the party at a competitive 2 disadvantage; and 3 (d) commercially sensitive and proprietary, confidential information that constitutes, 4 discusses or reflects trade secrets entitled to protection under various laws and 5 regulations, including but not limited to California’s Uniform Trade Secret Act. 6 Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of 7 disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information the parties are 8 entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the Parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of 9 such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of the 10 litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this 11 matter. It is the intent of the parties that information will not be designated as confidential for tactical 12 reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it has been maintained in 13 a confidential, non-public manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public 14 record of this case. 15 2. DEFINITIONS 16 2.1 Challenging Party: A Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of 17 information or items under this Order. 18 2.2 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: Information (regardless of how it is 19 generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule of 20 Civil Procedure 26(c) and as specified above in the Good Cause Statement. 21 2.3 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as their support 22 staff). 23 2.4 Designating Party: A Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that it 24 produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 25 2.5 Disclosure or Discovery Material: All items or information, regardless of the 26 medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, 27 testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or 28 responses to discovery in this matter. 1 2.6 Expert: A person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to 2 the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a 3 consultant in this action. 4 2.7 House Counsel: Attorneys who are employees of a party to this action and attorneys 5 on behalf of Allstate Life Insurance Company (“Allstate”)1, as Allstate administers certain Lincoln 6 Benefit Life Company policies. House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any 7 other outside counsel. 8 2.8 Non-Party: Any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal 9 entity not named as a Party to this action. 10 2.9 Outside Counsel of Record: Attorneys who are not employees of a party to this action 11 but are retained to represent or advise a party to this action and have appeared in this action on behalf 12 of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on behalf of that party. 13 2.10 Party: Any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, 14 consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staffs). 15 2.11 Producing Party: A Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery 16 Material in this action. 17 2.12 Professional Vendors: Persons or entities that provide litigation support services 18 (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing, 19 storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors.

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

Related

Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu
447 F.3d 1172 (Ninth Circuit, 2006)
Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC
809 F.3d 1092 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Farley v. Lincoln Benefit Life Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farley-v-lincoln-benefit-life-co-caed-2022.