Kyle McCune v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedAugust 6, 2025
Docket2:24-cv-07890
StatusUnknown

This text of Kyle McCune v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Kyle McCune v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.) 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
Kyle McCune v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., (C.D. Cal. 2025).

Opinion

1 SSaHrAahP SEhRaOpe LroA, WCa Fl.I BRaMr No. 281748 2 sarah@shaperolawfirm.com 100 Pine St., Ste. 530 3 San Francisco, CA 94111 4 Telephone: (415) 273-3504 Facsimile: (415) 358-4116 5 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff 7 KYLE MCCUNE 8 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP 9 A Limited Liability Partnership Including Professional Corporations 10 JOHN C. DINEEN, Cal Bar No. 222095 11 jdineen@sheppardmullin.com 501 West Broadway, 18th Floor 12 San Diego, California 92101-3598 13 Telephone: 619.338.6500 Facsimile: 619.234.3815 14 15 Attorneys for Defendant WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. 16 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 18 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 19 20 KYLE MCCUNE, an individual Case No. 2:24-CV-07890-FLA-SK 21 Plaintiff, STIPULATED PROTECTIVE 22 ORDER v. 23 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; and [DISCOVERY MATTER: 24 Does 1-50, inclusive REFERRED TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE STEVE 25 Defendants. KIM] 26 Assigned to: Hon. Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha 27 Courtroom 6B, 6th Floor 28 Complaint Filed: July 29, 2024 1 2 1. A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 3 4 Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, 5 proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public 6 disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may 7 be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to 8 enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this 9 Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to 10 discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends 11 only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment 12 under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth 13 in Section 12.3 (Filing Protected Material), below, that this Stipulated Protective 14 Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local 15 Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will 16 be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal. 17 18 B. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT 19 20 Good cause exists for a Protective Order because both Plaintiff and 21 Defendant’s document productions may disclose information relating to (1) private 22 bank customer information, such as account numbers; (2) Plaintiff’s Personally 23 Identifiable Information (“PII”); (3) the PII of non-party employees of Defendant; 24 (4) the confidential business practices of Defendant, which Defendant safeguards as 25 a means to ensure competitiveness in the financial industry; and (5) Defendant’s 26 confidential investigation practices relating to loss mitigation and foreclosure. See 27 Harmon v. City of Santa Clara, 323 F.R.D. 617, 623 (N.D. Cal. 2018) (identifying 28 1 privacy interests, among others when considering existence of good cause); 2 Nutratech, Inc. v. Syntech (SSPF) Int’l, Inc., 242 F.R.D. 552, 554 (C.D. Cal. 2007) 3 (recognizing trade secrets and confidential business information as legitimate 4 categories of information subject to protection). 5 6 2. DEFINITIONS 7 2.1 Action: Kyle McCune v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al., Case No. 2:24- 8 CV-07890-FLA-SK, originally filed in Santa Barbara Superior Court on July 29, 9 2024 and removed to the Central District of California on September 16, 2024. 10 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the 11 designation of information or items under this Order. 12 2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of 13 how it is generated, stored, or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for 14 protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in 15 the Good Cause Statement. 16 2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as 17 their support staff). 18 2.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information 19 or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as 20 “CONFIDENTIAL.” 21 2.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless 22 of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, 23 among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced 24 or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. 25 2.7 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter 26 pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as 27 an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 28 1 2.8 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action. 2 House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside 3 counsel. 4 2.9 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, 5 or other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. 6 2.10 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a 7 party to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this Action and 8 have appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm 9 which has appeared on behalf of that party, including support staff. 10 2.11 Party: any party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors, 11 employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their 12 support staffs). 13 2.12 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or 14 Discovery Material in this Action. 15 2.13 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation 16 support services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or 17 demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) 18 and their employees and subcontractors. 19 2.14 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is 20 designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 21 2.15 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery 22 Material from a Producing Party. 23 24 3. SCOPE 25 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only 26 Protected Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or 27 extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or 28 1 compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or 2 presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. 3 Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by the orders of the 4 trial judge. This Order does not govern the use of Protected Material at trial. 5 6 4. DURATION 7 Even after final disposition of this litigation, as defined in Section 13 (FINAL 8 DISPOSITION), the confidentiality obligations imposed by this Order shall remain 9 in effect until a Designating Party agrees otherwise in writing or a court order 10 otherwise directs. 11 12 5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL 13 5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection. 14 Each Party or Non-Party that designates information or items for protection under 15 this Order must take care to limit any such designation to specific material that 16 qualifies under the appropriate standards. The Designating Party must designate for 17 protection only those parts of material, documents, items, or oral or written 18 communications that qualify so that other portions of the material, documents, 19 items, or communications for which protection is not warranted are not swept 20 unjustifiably within the ambit of this Order. 21 Mass, indiscriminate, or routinized designations are prohibited.

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

Related

Nutratech, Inc. v. Syntech (SSPF) International, Inc.
242 F.R.D. 552 (C.D. California, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Kyle McCune v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kyle-mccune-v-wells-fargo-bank-na-cacd-2025.