Keith Huckaby v. CRST Expedited, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California·Decided February 10, 2022·No. 2:21-cv-07766·Unknown

Opinion

Case 2:21-cv-07766-ODW-PD Document 37 Filed 02/10/22 Page 1 of 17 Page ID #:374

2 3 4 5

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8

9 KEITH HUCKABY, individually and 10 on behalf of all other persons similar Case No. 2:21-cv-07766-ODW-PD situated, and on behalf of the general 11 public, STIPULATED PROTECTIVE 12 Plaintiff, ORDER1

v. 13 14 CRST EXPEDITED, INC., an Iowa corporation; CRST 15 INTERNATIONAL, INC., an Iowa Corporation; and DOES 1 16 THROUGH 30, inclusive, Defendants. 17

18 19 1. A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 20 Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, 21 proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public 22 disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be 23 warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter 24 the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order 25 does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and 26

27 1 This Stipulated Protective Order is substantially based on the model protective 28 order provided under Magistrate Judge Patricia Donahue’s Procedures. Case 2:21-cv-07766-ODW-PD Document 37 Filed 02/10/22 Page 2 of 17 Page ID #:375

1 that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the 2 limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the 3 applicable legal principles. 4 5 B. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT 6 As a putative class action involving wage and hour claims, as well as claims 7 brought under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act and California’s Investigative 8 Consumer Reporting Agencies Act, this case is likely to involve discovery of 9 putative class members’ contact information and may also involve other sensitive 10 information. This case may additionally involve discovery of records that include 11 customer and pricing information and other valuable research, development, 12 commercial, financial, technical and/or proprietary information for which special 13 protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than 14 prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials 15 and information consist of, among other things, confidential business or financial 16 information, information regarding confidential business practices, or other 17 confidential research, development, or commercial information (including 18 information implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise 19 generally unavailable to the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise 20 protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, 21 or common law. 22 Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt 23 resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately 24 protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the 25 parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in preparation for 26 and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of the litigation, and 27 serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this 28 matter. It is the intent of the parties that information will not be designated as 2 Case 2:21-cv-07766-ODW-PD Document 37 Filed 02/10/22 Page 3 of 17 Page ID #:376

1 confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good 2 faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and 3 there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of this case. 4 5 C. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PROCEDURE FOR FILING UNDER SEAL 6 The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this 7 Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information 8 under seal; Local Civil Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and 9 the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to 10 file material under seal. 11 There is a strong presumption that the public has a right of access to judicial 12 proceedings and records in civil cases. In connection with non-dispositive motions, 13 good cause must be shown to support a filing under seal. See Kamakana v. City and 14 County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006), Phillips v. Gen. Motors 15 Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002), Makar-Welbon v. Sony Electrics, 16 Inc., 187 F.R.D. 576, 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999) (even stipulated protective orders require 17 good cause showing), and a specific showing of good cause or compelling reasons 18 with proper evidentiary support and legal justification, must be made with respect to 19 Protected Material that a party seeks to file under seal. The parties’ mere designation 20 of Disclosure or Discovery Material as CONFIDENTIAL does not—without the 21 submission of competent evidence by declaration, establishing that the material 22 sought to be filed under seal qualifies as confidential, privileged, or otherwise 23 protectable—constitute good cause. 24 Further, if a party requests sealing related to a dispositive motion or trial, then 25 compelling reasons, not only good cause, for the sealing must be shown, and the 26 relief sought shall be narrowly tailored to serve the specific interest to be protected. 27 See Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 677-79 (9th Cir. 2010). For each 28 item or type of information, document, or thing sought to be filed or introduced under 3 Case 2:21-cv-07766-ODW-PD Document 37 Filed 02/10/22 Page 4 of 17 Page ID #:377

1 seal in connection with a dispositive motion or trial, the party seeking protection 2 must articulate compelling reasons, supported by specific facts and legal 3 justification, for the requested sealing order. Again, competent evidence supporting 4 the application to file documents under seal must be provided by declaration. 5 Any document that is not confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable in 6 its entirety will not be filed under seal if the confidential portions can be redacted. If 7 documents can be redacted, then a redacted version for public viewing, omitting only 8 the confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable portions of the document, shall 9 be filed. Any application that seeks to file documents under seal in their entirety 10 should include an explanation of why redaction is not feasible. 11 12 2. DEFINITIONS 13 2.1 Action: Keith Huckaby v. CRST Expedited, Inc., CRST International, 14 Inc. and Does 1-30, inclusive; Case No. 2:21-cv-07766-ODW-PD in the United States 15 District Court for the Central District of California. 16 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation 17 of information or items under this Order. 18 2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of 19 how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for 20 protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in the 21 Good Cause Statement. 22 2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as 23 their support staff).

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

Keith Huckaby v. CRST Expedited, Inc., (C.D. Cal. 2022).

Keith Huckaby v. CRST Expedited, Inc. (Keith Huckaby v. CRST Expedited, Inc.) — 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)
Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu
447 F.3d 1172 (Ninth Circuit, 2006)
Makar-Wellbon v. Sony Electronics, Inc.
187 F.R.D. 576 (E.D. Wisconsin, 1999)