Jerry Cox v. Mariposa County

District Court, E.D. California·Decided April 22, 2024·No. 1:19-cv-01105·Unknown

Opinion

2 4 6 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA '0 | JERRY COX AND JDC LAND CASE NO.: 1:19-cv-01105-JLT-BAM COMPANY LLC D Plaintiffs, STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF PROTECTIV ORDER REGARDING CONFIDENTIAL 13 Vv. DOCUMENTS AND PROTECTIVE ORDER 14 | MARIPOSA COUNTY; SHERIFF DEPUTY WILLIAM ATKINSON; SHERIFF DEPUTY 15 | WESLEY SMITH; ASHLEY HARRIS; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE. ° Defendants. 17 18 19 20 By and through their attorneys of record, Plaintiffs JERRY COX and JDC LANI 21 |COMPANY LLC and Defendants MARIPOSA COUNTY; SHERIFF DEPUTY □□□□□□□ 22 | ATKINSON; SHERIFF DEPUTY WESLEY SMITH; and ASHLEY HARRIS hereby AGREE ANI 23 | STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS: 24 11 PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 25 ]}1.1 Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to involve production of confidentia 26 proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and frot 27 use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, th 28 parties hereby stipulate to and petition the court to enter the following Stipulated Protectiv

1 Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on a 2 disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosut 3 and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidenti 4 treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth i 5 Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to fil 6 confidential information under seal; Local Rule 140 of the Eastern District of California set 7 forth the procedures to be followed when a party seeks an order from the court to file materi: 8 under seal. 9 12 DEFINITIONS 10 □□□ Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of information or iter 11 under this Order. 12 2.2 Confidential Discovery Material: (a) information protected from disclosure by statute; (t 13 information that reveals trade secrets; (c) research, development, technical, commercial ¢ 14 financial information that the party has maintained confidential, including information relate 15 to proprietary licensing, marketing, and analyses; (d) information concerning any individua 16 (e) personal identity information; (f) personnel or employment records of a person; or (g) othe 17 information or documents regarding a person protected by the person’s right to privac 18 provided by the California and U.S. Constitutions. 19 |2.3. Confidential Discovery Material may be designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHL 20 CONFIDENTIAL: ATTORNEY’S EYES ONLY”. 21 12.4 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL: ATTORNEY’S EYES ONLY” designation shall be applie 22 to highly sensitive confidential information that the designating party believes in good fait 23 would create a substantial risk of serious injury if disclosed to another party or non-party, an 24 that such risk cannot be avoided by less restrictive means, such as highly personal and privat 25 information, including personal medical records, or private photographs or images. 26 12.5 Counsel: Counsel of record, Outside Counsel of Record, and House Counsel; include 27 counsels’ support staff. 28 12.6 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that it produce OTIPTTT ATION AND IPROPOSEDLCONEIDENTIATTITY ORDER

enn ne en ene nnn nnn nn nn nnn nnn nnn nnn nn nn ne OO

1 in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 2 12.7 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium or manne 3 in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, vide 4 recorded testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated i 5 disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. 6 |2.8 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to the litigatio 7 who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a consultat 8 in this action. 9 |2.9 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this action. House Counsel does nc 10 include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel. 11 2.10 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity nc 12 named as a Party to this action. A Non-Party does not include a Party that is dismissed fro1 13 action. 14 12.11 Qutside Counsel of Record: attorneys (and their support staff) who are not employees of a part 15 to this action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this action and have appeared 1 16 this action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on beha 17 of that party. 18 2.12 Party: any named party to this action, including all of its counsel, officers, directors, employee: 19 consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staff). Partie 20 dismissed from this action continue to be designated as a “Party” for purposes of this Stipulate 21 Protective Order. 22 2.13 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery Material in th: 23 action. 24 12.14 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services (e.g 25 photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing 26 storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors. 27 2.15 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated < 28 “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL: ATTORNEY’S EYES ONLY”. RTIPTIT ATION IPRQPOSEDICONEINENTTIATITY ORDER.

nen en nee ene nnn nnn nn nn nnn nnn nnn nnn nn nn ne OE

1 2.16 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a Producing Party 213 SCOPE 3 |3.1 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material (¢ 4 defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2 5 all copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any □□□□□□□□ 6 conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Materia 7 However, the protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order do not cover the followin 8 information: (a) any information that is in the public domain at the time of disclosure to 9 Receiving Party or becomes part of the public domain after its disclosure to a Receiving Part 10 as a result of publication not involving a violation of this Order, including becoming part of th 11 public record through trial or otherwise; and (b) any information known to the Receiving Part 12 prior to the disclosure or obtained by the Receiving Party after the disclosure from a sourc 13 who obtained the information lawfully and under no obligation of confidentiality to th 14 Designating Party. Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by a separat 15 agreement or order. 16 14 DURATION 17 |4.1 Even after final disposition of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations imposed by thi 18 Order shall remain in effect until a Designating Party agrees otherwise in writing or a cou 19 order otherwise directs. Final disposition shall be deemed to be the later of (1) dismissal of a 20 claims and defenses in this action, with or without prejudice; and (2) final judgment herein afte 21 the completion and exhaustion of all appeals, rehearings, remands, trials, or reviews of th 22 action, including the time limits for filing any motions or applications for extension of tim 23 pursuant to applicable law. 2415 DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL 25 5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection.

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

Jerry Cox v. Mariposa County, (E.D. Cal. 2024).

Jerry Cox v. Mariposa County (Jerry Cox v. Mariposa County) — 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)