John Roe CF 85 v. DOE 1, a corporation

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedJanuary 22, 2025
Docket5:24-cv-02356
StatusUnknown

This text of John Roe CF 85 v. DOE 1, a corporation (John Roe CF 85 v. DOE 1, a corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
John Roe CF 85 v. DOE 1, a corporation, (C.D. Cal. 2025).

Opinion

1 Lauren A. Welling (SBN: 291813) lwelling@sssfirm.com 2 Sarah Kissel Meier (SBN: 305315) skmeier@sssfirm.com 3 SLATER SLATER SCHULMAN LLP 8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 255 4 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Telephone: (310) 341-2086 5 Facsimile: (310) 773-5573

6 Attorneys for Plaintiff John Roe CF 85 7 Rick Richmond (SBN 194962) 8 rrichmond@larsonllp.com Andrew E. Calderón (SBN 316673) 9 acalderon@larsonllp.com Jina Yoon (SBN 331948) 10 jyoon@larsonllp.com LARSON LLP 11 555 South Flower Street, 30th Floor Los Angeles, California 90071 12 Telephone:(213) 436-4888 Facsimile: (213) 623-2000 13 Attorneys for Defendants Doe 1, a Utah 14 corporation sole, and Doe 2, a Utah nonprofit corporation 15 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - EASTERN DIVISION 18

19 JOHN ROE CF 85, Case No. 5:24-cv-02356-KK-DTB

20 Plaintiff, Judge: Hon. Kenly Kiya Kato

21 vs. DISCOVERY MATTER: Magistrate Judge: David T. Bristow 22 DOE 1, a corporation; DOE 2, a corporation; DOE 3, an entity of [PROPOSED] STIPULATED 23 unknown form; and DOES 4 to 100, PROTECTIVE ORDER Inclusive, 24 Defendants. 25

26 27 1 1. GENERAL 2 1.1 Purposes and Limitations. Discovery in this action is likely to involve 3 production of confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special 4 protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than 5 prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby 6 stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. 7 The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on all 8 disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public 9 disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled 10 to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties further 11 acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective 12 Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local 13 Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will 14 be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal. 15 1.2 Good Cause Statement. This Action arises from allegations of 16 childhood sexual abuse and is likely to involve medical records, psychiatric records, 17 confidential church membership records, and other private information implicating 18 the privacy rights of third parties for which special protection from public disclosure 19 and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this action is warranted. 20 Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution 21 of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect 22 information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the parties are 23 permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the 24 conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the 25 ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this matter. It 26 is the intent of the parties that information will not be designated as confidential for 27 tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it 1 has been maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and there is good cause 2 why it should not be part of the public record of this case. 3 2. DEFINITIONS 4 2.1 Action: John Roe CF 85 v. Doe 1, et al, No. 5:24-cv-02356-KK-DTB 5 (C.D. Cal. 2024). 6 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation 7 of information or items under this Order. 8 2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of 9 how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for 10 protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in 11 the Good Cause Statement. 12 2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as 13 their support staff). 14 2.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or 15 items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as 16 “CONFIDENTIAL.” 17 2.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless 18 of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, 19 among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or 20 generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. 21 2.7 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter 22 pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as 23 an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 24 2.8 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action, 25 and, for purposes of Defendants, attorneys from Kirton McConkie and their staff. 26 House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside 27 counsel. 1 2.9 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or 2 other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. 3 2.10 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a party 4 to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this Action and have 5 appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm that 6 has appeared on behalf of that party, including support staff. 7 2.11 Party: any party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors, 8 employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their 9 support staffs). 10 2.12 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or 11 Discovery Material in this Action. 12 2.13 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support 13 services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or 14 demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) 15 and their employees and subcontractors. 16 2.14 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is 17 designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 18 2.15 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material 19 from a Producing Party. 20 3. SCOPE 21 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only 22 Protected Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or 23 extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or 24 compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or 25 presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. 26 Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by the orders of the 27 trial judge. This Order does not govern the use of Protected Material at trial. 1 4. DURATION 2 Once a case proceeds to trial, all of the court filed information to be introduced at 3 trial, that was previously designated as confidential or maintained pursuant to this 4 protective order becomes public and will be presumptively available to all members 5 of the public, including the press, unless compelling reasons supported by specific 6 factual findings to proceed otherwise are made to the trial judge in advance of trial. 7 See Kamakana v. City of and Cty. Of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180-81 (9th Cir. 8 2006) (distinguishing “good cause” showing for sealing documents produced in 9 discovery from “compelling” reasons standard when merits related documents are 10 part of court record).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
John Roe CF 85 v. DOE 1, a corporation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-roe-cf-85-v-doe-1-a-corporation-cacd-2025.