Ferguson v. KIA Motors America, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California·Decided August 4, 2021·No. 2:20-cv-01192·Unknown

Opinion

1 SPENCER P. HUGRET (SBN: 240424) shugret@grsm.com 2 ERIC TSAI (SBN: 273056) etsai@grsm.com 3 GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000 4 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 875-3193 5 Facsimile: (415) 986-8054

6 Attorneys for Defendant 7 KIA AMERICA, INC. f/k/a KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC. 8 JOHN BARKER (SBN: 279718) 9 jbarker@consumerlawcenter.com JENNIFER BASOLA (SBN: 231538) 10 jbasola@consumerlawcenter.com KROHN & MOSS, LTD. 11 2447 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 200 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 12 Telephone: (323) 988-2400 13 Facsimile: (866) 431-5575

14 Attorneys for Plaintiffs BONNIE FERGUSON and SUSAN NELSON 15 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18 BONNIE FERGUSON and SUSAN No. 2:20-cv-01192-KJM-DB NELSON, 19

20 Plaintiffs, STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

21 v.

22 KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC.,

23 Defendant. 24

26 27 1 1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 2 Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to involve production of 3 confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public 4 disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. 5 Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated 6 Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on 7 all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure 8 and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment 9 under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, 10 below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information 11 under seal; documents that are the subject of a protective order may be filed under seal only if a 12 sealing order is first obtained in compliance with L.R. 141. 13 2. DEFINITIONS 14 2.1 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of 15 information or items under this Order. 16 2.2 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is 17 generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule 18 of Civil Procedure 26(c). 19 2.3 Counsel (without qualifier): Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as 20 well as their support staff). 21 2.4 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that 22 it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 23 2.5 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the 24 medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, 25 testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or 26 responses to discovery in this matter. 27 2.6 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to 1 consultant in this action. 2 2.7 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this action. House 3 Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel. 4 2.8 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal 5 entity not named as a Party to this action. 6 2.9 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a party to this 7 action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this action and have appeared in this action 8 on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on behalf of that party. 9 2.10 Party: any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, 10 consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staffs). 11 2.11 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery 12 Material in this action. 13 2.12 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services 14 (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and 15 organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and 16 subcontractors. 17 2.13 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as 18 “CONFIDENTIAL.” 19 2.14 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a 20 Producing Party. 21 3. SCOPE 22 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material 23 (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) 24 all copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, 25 conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. 26 However, the protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order do not cover the following 27 information: (a) any information that is in the public domain at the time of disclosure to a 1 a result of publication not involving a violation of this Order, including becoming part of the public 2 record through trial or otherwise; and (b) any information known to the Receiving Party prior to 3 the disclosure or obtained by the Receiving Party after the disclosure from a source who obtained 4 the information lawfully and under no obligation of confidentiality to the Designating Party. Any 5 use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by a separate agreement or order. 6 4. DURATION 7 Even after final disposition of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations imposed by this 8 Order shall remain in effect until a Designating Party agrees otherwise in writing or a court order 9 otherwise directs. Final disposition shall be deemed to be the later of (1) dismissal of all claims 10 and defenses in this action, with or without prejudice; and (2) final judgment herein after the 11 completion and exhaustion of all appeals, rehearings, remands, trials, or reviews of this action, 12 including the time limits for filing any motions or applications for extension of time pursuant to 13 applicable law. 14 5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL 15 5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection. Each Party 16 or Non-Party that designates information or items for protection under this Order must take care 17 to limit any such designation to specific material that qualifies under the appropriate standards. 18 The Designating Party must designate for protection only those parts of material, documents, 19 items, or oral or written communications that qualify – so that other portions of the material, 20 documents, items, or communications for which protection is not warranted are not swept 21 unjustifiably within the ambit of this Order. 22 Mass, indiscriminate, or routinized designations are prohibited. Designations that are 23 shown to be clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper purpose (e.g., to 24 unnecessarily encumber or retard the case development process or to impose unnecessary expenses 25 and burdens on other parties) expose the Designating Party to sanctions. 26 If it comes to a Designating Party’s attention that information or items that it designated 27 for protection do not qualify for protection, that Designating Party must promptly notify all other 1 5.2 Manner and Timing of Designations. Except as otherwise provided in this Order 2 (see, e.g., second paragraph of section 5.2(a) below), or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, 3 Disclosure or Discovery Material that qualifies for protection under this Order must be clearly so 4 designated before the material is disclosed or produced.

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

Ferguson v. KIA Motors America, Inc., (E.D. Cal. 2021).

Ferguson v. KIA Motors America, Inc. (Ferguson v. KIA Motors America, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

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)