Lopez v. Pavestone, LLC

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. California
DecidedOctober 24, 2022
Docket2:22-cv-01419
StatusUnknown

This text of Lopez v. Pavestone, LLC (Lopez v. Pavestone, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lopez v. Pavestone, LLC, (E.D. Cal. 2022).

Opinion

1 KERINICG BS.L KEIYN G&S KLEINYG, ESSLQE.Y (,S ABPNC-1 8 5123) eric@kingsleykingsley.com 2 LIANE KATZENSTEIN, ESQ. (SBN-259230) 3 liane@kingsleykingsley.com JESSICA L. ADLOUNI, ESQ. (SBN-328571) 4 jessica@kingsleykingsley.com 16133 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1200 5 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 990-8300 6 Fax: (818) 990-2903 7 Attorneys for Plaintiff Jorge Luis Jaramillo Lopez 8

9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 JORGE LUIS JARAMILLO LOPEZ, No. 2:22-cv-1419 TLN DB an individual, 13

PLAINTIFF, 14 v. STIPULATED PROTECTIVE 15 ORDER CONCERNING THE PAVESTONE, LLC, a corporation; and 16 DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, TREATMENT OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION 17 DEFENDANT. 18

20 21

22 23 24 25 26 27 1 Counsel for Jorge Luis Jaramillo Lopez (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant 2 Pavestone, LLC (“Defendant”) (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their 3 respective counsel of record, stipulate as follows: 4 1. A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 5 Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, 6 proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public 7 disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may 8 be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to 9 enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this 10 Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to 11 discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends 12 only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment 13 under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth 14 in Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them 15 to file confidential information under seal; Local Rule 141 sets forth the 16 procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a 17 party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal. 18 19 B. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT 20 This action is likely to involve confidential, commercial, financial, 21 proprietary, and/or private information, including employee personally identifiable 22 information and health information, for which special protection from public 23 disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this action is 24 warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials and information consist of, 25 among other things, confidential business or financial information, information 26 regarding confidential business practices, or other confidential research, 27 development, or commercial information (including information implicating 1 public, or which may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under 2 state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. Accordingly, 3 to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes 4 over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information the 5 parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the parties are permitted 6 reasonable necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of 7 trial, to address their handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends of 8 justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this matter. It is the 9 intent of the parties that information will not be designated as confidential for 10 tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it 11 has been maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and there is good cause 12 why it should not be part of the public record of this case. 13 2. DEFINITIONS 14 2.1 Action: this pending federal lawsuit, styled Jorge Luis Jaramillo 15 Lopez v. Pavestone, LLC, USDC Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:22-cv- 16 01419-TLN-DB. 17 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the 18 designation of information or items under this Order. 19 2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of 20 how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for 21 protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) and other applicable law, 22 and as specified above in the Good Cause Statement. 23 2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as 24 their support staff). 25 2.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or 26 items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as 27 “CONFIDENTIAL.” 1 2.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless 2 of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, 3 among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced 4 or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. 5 2.7 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter 6 pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve 7 as an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 8 2.8 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action. 9 House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside 10 counsel. 11 2.9 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, 12 or other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. 13 2.10 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a 14 party to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this Action 15 and have appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law 16 firm which has appeared on behalf of that party, and includes support staff. 17 2.11 Party: any party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors, 18 employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their 19 support staffs). 20 2.12 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or 21 Discovery Material in this Action. 22 2.13 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation 23 support services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or 24 demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) 25 and their employees and subcontractors. 26 2.14 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is 27 designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 1 2.15 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material 2 from a Producing Party. 3 3. SCOPE 4 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only 5 Protected Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or 6 extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or 7 compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or 8 presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. 9 Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by the orders of the 10 trial judge. This Order does not govern the use of Protected Material at trial. 11

12 4. DURATION 13 Even after final disposition of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations 14 imposed by this Order shall remain in effect until a Designating Party agrees 15 otherwise in writing or a court order otherwise directs. Final disposition shall be 16 deemed to be the later of (1) dismissal of all claims and defenses in this Action, 17 with or without prejudice; and (2) final judgment herein after the completion and 18 exhaustion of all appeals, rehearings, remands, trials, or reviews of this Action, 19 including the time limits for filing any motions or applications for extension of 20 time pursuant to applicable law. 21 5.

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

Related

Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu
447 F.3d 1172 (Ninth Circuit, 2006)
Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC
809 F.3d 1092 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)
Greene v. Wilbur
3 A. 4 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1886)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Lopez v. Pavestone, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lopez-v-pavestone-llc-caed-2022.