Federal Trade Commission v. Jason Cardiff

District Court, C.D. California·Decided September 24, 2019·No. 5:18-cv-02104·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 No. ED 5:18-cv-02104-SJO-PLAx 11 Federal Trade Commission, STIPULATED PROTECTIVE 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. 14 Jason Cardiff, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 1. GENERAL 21 1.1 Purposes and Limitations. Discovery in this action is likely to involve 22 production of confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special 23 protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than 24 prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby 25 stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated Protective 26 Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections 27 on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from 28 1 public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are 2 entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties 3 further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 13.3, below, that this Stipulated 4 Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; 5 Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the 6 standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file 7 material under seal. 8 1.2 Good Cause Statement. This action is likely to involve trade secrets, 9 customer and pricing lists, and other valuable research, development, commercial, 10 financial, technical and/or proprietary information for which special protection 11 from public disclosure may be warranted. Such confidential and proprietary 12 materials and information consist of, among other things, confidential business or 13 financial information, information regarding confidential business practices, or 14 other confidential research, development, or commercial information (including 15 information implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise 16 generally unavailable to the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise 17 protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, 18 or common law. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the 19 prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to 20 adequately protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to 21 ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in 22 preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of 23 the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information 24 is justified in this matter. It is the intent of the parties that information will not be 25 designated as confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated 26 without a good faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, non-public 27 28 1 manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of 2 this case. 3 4 2. DEFINITIONS 5 2.1 Action: Federal Trade Commission v. Jason Cardiff, et al., Civil 6 Action No. ED 5:18-cv-02104-SJO-PLAx (C.D. Cal.). 7 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the 8 designation of information or items under this Order. 9 2.3 Commission: the Plaintiff, Federal Trade Commission. 10 2.4 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of 11 how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for 12 protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in 13 the Good Cause Statement. 14 2.5 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as 15 their support staff). 16 2.6 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party or the Receiver that 17 designates information or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to 18 discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 19 2.7 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless 20 of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, 21 among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced 22 or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. 23 2.8 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter 24 pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve 25 as an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 26 27 28 1 2.9 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action. 2 House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside 3 counsel. 4 2.10 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, 5 or other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. 6 2.11 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a 7 Party, Non-Party, or Receiver in this Action but are retained to represent or advise 8 a Party, Non-Party, or Receiver in this Action and have appeared in this Action on 9 behalf of that Party, Non-Party, or Receiver or are affiliated with a law firm that 10 has appeared on behalf of that Party, Non-Party, or Receiver, including support 11 staff. 12 2.12 Party: any party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors, 13 employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their 14 support staffs). 15 2.13 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party or the Receiver that produces 16 Disclosure or Discovery Material in this Action. 17 2.14 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation 18 support services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or 19 demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) 20 and their employees and subcontractors. 21 2.15 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is 22 designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 23 2.16 Receiver: the Receiver in this Action, Robb Evans & Associates LLC, 24 including all of its officers, directors, employees, House Counsel, consultants, 25 retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staffs). 26 2.17 Receiving Party: a Party or the Receiver that receives Disclosure or 27 Discovery Material from a Producing Party. 28 1 2.18 Undercover Information: any information relating to undercover 2 identities that Commission employees used in connection with their investigation, 3 including undercover names and any related phone numbers, email addresses, 4 physical addresses, credit card numbers, or other payment information 5 6 3. SCOPE 7 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only 8 Protected Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or 9 extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or 10 compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or 11 presentations by Parties, Non-Parties, Receiver, or their Counsel that might reveal 12 Protected Material. 13 Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by the orders of the 14 trial judge. This Order does not govern the use of Protected Material at trial. 15 16 4. DURATION 17 Once a case proceeds to trial, all of the court-filed information to be 18 introduced that was previously designated as confidential or maintained pursuant 19 to this protective order becomes public and will be presumptively available to all 20 members of the public, including the press, unless compelling reasons supported 21 by specific factual findings to proceed otherwise are made to the trial judge in 22 advance of the trial. See Kamakana v. City and Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 23 1180-81 (9th Cir.

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

Federal Trade Commission v. Jason Cardiff, (C.D. Cal. 2019).

Federal Trade Commission v. Jason Cardiff (Federal Trade Commission v. Jason Cardiff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Cleveland
19 A. 17 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1889)