L.D. v. EzyRoller, LLC

District Court, C.D. California·Decided February 2, 2024·No. 8:23-cv-01715·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

L. D., a minor, by and through her Case No.: 8:23-cv-01715-CJC-ADS guardian ad litem, JENNIFER ORDER Plaintiff, District Judge: Hon. Cormac J. Carney v. Magistrate Judge: Hon. Autumn D. Spaeth EZYROLLER LLC, a Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1 through 50, Complaint Filed: May 12, 2023 inclusive, Removal: September 14, 2023 Defendant.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the Parties, Plaintiff L.D., by and through her guardian ad litem, JENNIFER DIENHART (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant EZYROLLER, LLC (“Defendant”), (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby enter into this Stipulated Protective Order with respect to documents disclosed by Defendant, as follows: I. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS A. Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section XIII(C), below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the Court to file material under seal. II. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT A. The nature of this Action is based on Plaintiff’s alleged injuries related to her alleged use of the EzyRoller Drifter Pro X. Plaintiff’s case arises in strict liability for product design, manufacturing, and warning, as well as negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of express and implied warranties. As such, Plaintiff anticipates seeking the discovery of Data or Discovery Material directly involving Defendant EzyRoller LLC’s trade secrets, customer and pricing lists, and other valuable research, development, commercial, financial, technical and/or proprietary information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this action is

warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials and information consist of, among other things, confidential business, confidential financial information, information regarding confidential business practices, or other confidential research, development, or commercial information (including information implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise generally unavailable to the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, applicable international law, court rules, case decisions, or common law. Disclosure of sensitive, confidential, and proprietary business and financial information in civil discovery should be done only under properly fashioned protective orders as secret information essential to the continued operation of a business or industry that may be afforded some

measure of protection against unnecessary disclosure. (Davis v. Leal (E.D. Cal. 1999) 43 F.Supp.2d 1102, 1110) Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, while adequately protecting privileged and sensitive information the Parties are entitled to keep confidential, and to ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this matter. It is the intent of the parties that information will not be designated as confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of this case. A. Action: the above-entitled proceeding Case No. 8:23-cv-01715-CJC-ADS

and includes the proceedings from this case prior to its removal to federal COURT (California State Superior Court County of Orange, Case No. 30-2023-01325281- B. Challenging Party: A Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of information or items under this Order. C. “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: Information (regardless of how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in the Good Cause Statement. D. Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as their support staff).

E. Designating Party: A Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” F. Data or Discovery Material: All items or information, regardless of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. G. Expert: A person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. H. House Counsel: Attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action. House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside

counsel. I. Non-Party: Any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. J. Outside Counsel of Record: Attorneys who are not employees of a Party to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this Action and have appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on behalf of that party, and includes support staff. K. Party: Any party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staffs). L. Producing Party: A Party or Non-Party that produces Data or Discovery

Material in this Action. M. Professional Vendors: Persons or entities that provide litigation support services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors. N. Protected Material: Any Data or Discovery Material that is designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” O. Receiving Party: A Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a Producing Party. P. Disclose: To reveal, divulge, give, or make available materials, or any part thereof, or any information contained therein.

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

L.D. v. EzyRoller, LLC, (C.D. Cal. 2024).

L.D. v. EzyRoller, LLC (L.D. v. EzyRoller, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davis v. Leal
43 F. Supp. 2d 1102 (E.D. California, 1999)
Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu
447 F.3d 1172 (Ninth Circuit, 2006)