Jicarilla Apache Nation v. United States

60 Fed. Cl. 413, 2004 U.S. Claims LEXIS 86, 2004 WL 842264
CourtUnited States Court of Federal Claims
DecidedApril 19, 2004
DocketNo. 02-25L
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 60 Fed. Cl. 413 (Jicarilla Apache Nation v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Federal Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jicarilla Apache Nation v. United States, 60 Fed. Cl. 413, 2004 U.S. Claims LEXIS 86, 2004 WL 842264 (uscfc 2004).

Opinion

CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

ALLEGRA, Judge.

This case is before the court pursuant to Plaintiffs Motion for Entry of Confidentiality Agreement and Protective Order.

The court has reviewed the motion and finds that good cause exists for approval and entry of the Confidentiality Agreement and Protective Order pursuant to RCFC 26(c) and RCFC 16(c)(3). Entry of this order will facilitate efficient discovery and authorize production of confidential and proprietary records while protecting them from further disclosure consistent with Applicable Confidentiality Laws, as defined below, and will avoid waivers of exemptions from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

1. Scope and Definitions. This Order shall govern production in this case of records in either party’s possession, custody, or control. It shall limit use and further disclosure, both within and outside of alternative dispute resolution proceedings, of records that a party receives pursuant to this Order. This Order shall not govern production, use, or disclosure of records within the possession, custody, or control of Arthur Andersen, LLP, as of the date of this Order.

a. “record” defined. As used in this Order, “record” means any book, bill, calendar, chart, check, compilation, computation, computer or network activity log, correspondence, data, database, diagram, diary, document, draft, drawing, e-mail, file, folder, film, graph, graphic presentation, image, index, inventory, invoice, jotting, journal, ledger, machine readable material, map, memo, metadata, minutes, note, order, paper, photograph, printout, recording, report, spreadsheet, statement, summary, telephone message record or log, transcript, video, voicemail, voucher, webpage, work paper, writing, or worksheet, or any other item or group of documentary material or information, regardless of physical or electronic format or characteristic, and any information therein, and copies, notes, and recordings thereof.

b. “Applicable Confidentiality Laws” defined. As used in this Order, “Applicable Confidentiality Laws” means the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a; the Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1905; certain provisions of the National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. § 470w-3, the Archeological Resources Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. § 470hh(a), the Indian Mineral Development Act, 25 U.S.C. § 2103(e), the Mineral Leasing Act, 30 U.S.C. § 208-1, the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, 30 U.S.C. § 1201, and the Defense Production Act, 50 U.S.CApp. § 2155(e); any regulation promulgated pursuant to any of the above Acts; and any other federal statute or regulation which protects federal records from public disclosure. The attorney-client privilege, the deliberative process privilege, and the attorney workproduet doctrine are not Applicable Confidentiality Laws.

2. Production Authority. Any records that either party asserts are protected from disclosure by Applicable Confidentiality Laws are hereby authorized to be produced subject to the provisions of this Order.

3. Privilege Review, Log, and Redactions. Within a reasonable period of time after receipt of a request for access to records, whether by name, category, location, or otherwise, the responding party shall review the records and, as it completes privilege review, provide to the requesting party one or more privilege logs that list such records for which the responding party asserts privilege or protection from disclosure, provided that pursuant to paragraph 2 above such assertion of privilege or protection shall not rely on any Applicable Confidentiality Laws. Such reasonable period of time shall not exceed 60 days unless otherwise agreed by the parties or ordered by the Court. Such privi[415]*415lege logs shall state for each listed record and any attachments thereto the date, recipientes) (if known), author(s) (if known), privilege(s) asserted, a description of the content of the record sufficient to demonstrate the subject matter(s) addressed in the record and the basis of the asserted privilege or protection from disclosure, and information related to the location from which the record was obtained. Thereafter, the parties will confer to address any issue related to the privilege log(s) and to address the provision of copies of records for which the responding party asserts privilege or protection from disclosure, with redactions only of portions thereof that the responding party asserts to be privileged or protected.

4. Notification and Access. Concurrently with providing a privilege log pursuant to paragraph 3 above, the responding party shall notify the requesting party that the records subject to the access request under paragraph 3 are available for access at a designated place under designated terms. Pursuant to RCFC 34(b), the responding party shall then promptly provide the requesting party access to all such records for which the responding party does not assert privilege or protection from disclosure, in their entirety. The responding party shall provide such record access to the requesting party’s attorneys, paralegals, experts, consultants, and contractors (hereinafter, “Researchers”) as the requesting party’s attorneys may direct at dates and times agreeable to the parties. Any records made available for a party’s access shall be deemed confidential for purposes of the access.

5. Agency Access Procedures. Record access at offices of the parties’ agencies shall be governed by established research procedures and agreements of the responding party or the relevant agency thereof unless the requesting party has a reasonable need for alternative procedures or agreements, and provided that the agency access procedures as written, interpreted, or applied shall not limit or delay production under RCFC 34 or this Order. The responding party shall provide copies of such procedures and agreements to the requesting party promptly after identification of locations or agencies relevant to a particular access request. Each Researcher shall review any applicable access procedures and sign an applicable access agreement before being provided access to records pursuant to this paragraph unless otherwise agreed in writing or ordered by the Court.

6. Acknowledgments and Certifications. Before being provided access to or disclosure of records under this Order, any members of Plaintiff’s governing body and designated authorized tribal officials or employees of Plaintiff (collectively, “Plaintiff’s tribal officials”), any witnesses, court reporters, or copy or computer service personnel, and any of the parties’ experts, consultants, or contractors shall personally review this Order and shall execute and date an acknowledgment as follows:

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

Related

Jicarilla Apache Nation v. United States
93 Fed. Cl. 219 (Federal Claims, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
60 Fed. Cl. 413, 2004 U.S. Claims LEXIS 86, 2004 WL 842264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jicarilla-apache-nation-v-united-states-uscfc-2004.