In re San Juan Dupont Plaza Hotel Fire Litigation

121 F.R.D. 147, 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17329, 1988 WL 88010
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re San Juan Dupont Plaza Hotel Fire Litigation. Read the opinion of the Court — 745 F. Supp. 79
District Court, D. Puerto Rico·Decided July 19, 1988·No. No. MDL-721·Published

Opinion

PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 99

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER FOR THIS LITIGATION

ACOSTA, District Judge.

Before the Court is defendant Ralph Wilson Plastics Co.’s Motion Re Stipulated Protective Order, filed June 20,1988, Docket No. 3124, submitting a stipulation approved by the Discovery Committee which, pursuant to Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, establishes a mechanism for production of confidential information throughout this litigation in a manner that will ensure that its confidentiality is protected. We hereby APPROVE the proposed stipulation and pursuant thereto have prepared the attached Appendix which is hereby incorporated into the Case Management Order, Pretrial Order No. 20, filed November 25, 1987, Docket No. 591, as new section IX(K), and shall operate as the Confidentiality Order for this litigation.

The parties also stipulated that, for purposes of the Confidentiality Order, competitors of defendant Ralph Wilson Plastics Co. include defendants Nevamar and Laminart and any persons or entities acting on behalf of defendants Nevamar and Laminart.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 99: APPENDIX

(TO BE INSERTED AS NEW SUBSECTION IX(K) OF THE CMO AT PAGE 34. NOTE THAT NEW SUBSECTION IX(J) IS THE DESTRUCTIVE TESTING SUBSECTION INCORPORATED TO THE CMO BY THE APPENDIX TO PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 95)

IX. DISCOVERY

* * * * * *

K. Confidentiality Order

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)1 and in order to expedite the flow of discovery material, to facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality, to protect material entitled to be kept confidential, and to ensure that such [148]*148protection is afforded only to the proper material, all confidential materials requested or made available during the progress of this litigation shall be handled as indicated in this section.

This Confidentiality Order is not intended to restrict access to legitimate discovery materials by any party to this litigation— except, under narrow circumstances, when a competitor of the designating party is involved, see subsection (E)(3)(e) below. Rather, this order merely limits the disclosure of confidential information by the receiving party to (1) legitimate discovery needs, (2) proper trial preparation, and (3) introduction of admissible evidence at trial, while at the same time protecting the designating party from dissemination of its trade secrets.

1. Definitions

a. “Stamped Confidential Material”

“Stamped confidential material” is any material which bears the legend (or which shall otherwise have had the legend recorded upon it in a way that it brings to the attention of a reasonable examiner) “CONFIDENTIAL—SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER IN CIVIL ACTION NO. MDL-721, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO,” to indicate that it contains information believed to be subject to protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(7). To the extent that materials quote, summarize, or otherwise contain confidential information entitled to protection under this section, they may be accorded status as stamped confidential material, however, to the extent feasible, the designating party shall prepare said material in such a manner that the confidential information is bound separately from that not entitled to protection.

b. “Materials”

Rather than making this Confidentiality Order applicable to “documents” we find the term “materials” much broader and hence more appropriate. As used in this section, “materials” includes any writing, drawing, chart, film, video recording in any form, audio recording in any form or its transcript, retrievable data (computer or other) in whatever form, or any other tangible preservation of information whether produced or created by a party or another person, whether produced pursuant to Rule 34, subpoena, by agreement, or otherwise. The term “materials” also includes interrogatory answers, responses to requests for admission, deposition transcripts and exhibits, pleadings, motions, affidavits, and briefs.

c. “Designating” and “Receiving” Party

As hereinafter used, the party designating material as confidential shall be the “designating party.” The party receiving the document shall be the “receiving party.”

2. Non-Disclosure of Stamped Confidential Material

UNDER PENALTY OF CONTEMPT, STAMPED CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED TO ANY PERSON EXCEPT:

a. With the prior written consent of the designating party or other person originally designating the stamped confidential material; or

b. As provided in this Confidentiality Order.

3. Permissible Disclosures

a. Persons Designated by the Court

Notwithstanding subsection (E)(2), above, stamped confidential material may be disclosed to any person designated by the Court upon such terms as the Court may deem proper.

b. Persons Involved in this Litigation

Notwithstanding subsection (E)(2), above, stamped confidential material may be disclosed to:

(1) outside counsel for the parties in this action who are actively engaged in the conduct of this litigation;
(2) to the partners, associates, secretaries, paralegal assistants, and employees of such an attorney to the extent reason[149]*149ably necessary to render professional services in the litigation; and
(3) to court officials involved in this litigation (including court reporters, persons operating video recording equipment at depositions, and any special master appointed by the court);

BUT NOT TO (1) clients, (2) house counsel, or (3) attorneys involved in any related litigation in other courts (with the exception of the parallel state court action pending before Judge Angel F. Rossy).

c. Other Persons

Notwithstanding subsection (K)(2), above, and subject to the provisions of subsection (E)(3)(d), below, stamped confidential material may also be disclosed to:

(1) persons noticed for depositions or designated as trial witnesses in this litigation to the extent reasonably necessary in preparing to testify;
(2) outside consultants or experts retained for the purpose of assisting counsel in this litigation;
(3) employees of parties involved solely in one or more aspects of organizing, filing, coding, converting, storing, or retrieving data or designing programs for handling data connected with these actions, including the performance of such duties in relation to a computerized litigation support system in this litigation; and

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

In re San Juan Dupont Plaza Hotel Fire Litigation, 121 F.R.D. 147, 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17329, 1988 WL 88010 (prd 1988).

121 F.R.D. 147 (In re San Juan Dupont Plaza Hotel Fire Litigation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.