Negrete v. Amazon.com Services LLC

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. California
DecidedJuly 26, 2023
Docket1:23-cv-00379
StatusUnknown

This text of Negrete v. Amazon.com Services LLC (Negrete v. Amazon.com Services 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
Negrete v. Amazon.com Services LLC, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 JUAN CARLOS NEGRETE, Case No. 1:23-cv-00379-ADA-SAB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER ENTERING STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 13 v. (ECF No. 10) 14 AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 19 20 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 21 1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 22 Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to involve production of 23 confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure 24 and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, 25 Defendant Amazon.com Services LLC (“Amazon” or “Defendant”) and Plaintiff Juan Carlos 26 Negrete (“Plaintiff”) (collectively, “the parties”), by and through their counsel of record, hereby 27 stipulate to and petition the court to enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. 28 1 This Protective Order will provide protection for materials in which the Plaintiff or third 2 parties have a legally cognizable privacy interest, such as confidential business or financial 3 information, information regarding confidential business practices, sensitive information regarding 4 third parties, medical records, employees’ personnel records, or other confidential information 5 otherwise generally unavailable to the public or which may be privileged or otherwise protected 6 from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. The 7 sensitivity and confidentiality of these documents necessitates protection of these documents to be 8 addressed by court order. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt 9 resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information 10 the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable 11 necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their 12 handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such 13 information is justified in this matter. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer 14 blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords 15 from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to 16 confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set 17 forth in Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file 18 confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 141 sets forth the procedures that must be 19 followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file 20 material under seal. 21 2. DEFINITIONS 22 2.1 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of 23 information or items under this Order. 24 2.2 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is 25 generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule of 26 Civil Procedure 26(c). 27 2.3 Counsel (without qualifier): Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well 28 as their support staff). 1 2.4 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that it 2 produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 3 2.5 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the 4 medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, 5 testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or 6 responses to discovery in this matter. 7 2.6 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to 8 the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a 9 consultant in this action. 10 2.7 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this action. House 11 Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel. 12 2.8 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal 13 entity not named as a Party to this action. 14 2.9 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a party to this 15 action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this action and have appeared in this action 16 on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on behalf of that party. 17 2.10 Party: any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, 18 consultants, retained experts and investigators, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support 19 staffs). 20 2.11 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery 21 Material in this action. 22 2.12 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services 23 (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing, 24 storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors. 25 2.13 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as 26 “CONFIDENTIAL.” 27 2.14 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a 28 Producing Party. 1 3. SCOPE 2 The types of information eligible for protection under this Stipulation and Order include the 3 following: Plaintiff’s medical records; Plaintiff’s personnel records containing information which is 4 private pursuant to Article 1 Section 1 of the California Constitution. Courts have routinely 5 recognized a legally cognizable privacy interest in records of this nature. See e.g., Doe v. A. J. 6 Boggs & Co., No. 118CV01464AWIBAM, 2019 WL 1517567, at *6 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 8, 2019) 7 (citing Pettus v. Cole, 49 Cal. App. 4th 402, 440 (1996)) (ordering discovery of Plaintiffs’ medical 8 information as subject to protective order because “California law recognizes a constitutional right 9 to privacy in an individual’s medical history”); Buchanan v. Santos, No. 1:08-CV-01174-AWI, 10 2011 WL 2112475, at *5 (E.D. Cal. May 26, 2011) (ordering discovery of personnel records as 11 subject to protective order); Sanchez v. Cty. of Sacramento Sheriff’s Dep’t, No. 2:19-CV-01545 12 MCE AC, 2020 WL 3542328, at *5 (E.D. Cal. June 30, 2020) (ordering discovery of personnel 13 records as subject to protective order). 14 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material 15 (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) all 16 copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, 17 conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. 18 However, the protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order do not cover the following 19 information: (a) any information that is in the public domain at the time of disclosure to a Receiving 20 Party or becomes part of the public domain after its disclosure to a Receiving Party as a result of 21 publication not involving a violation of this Order, including becoming part of the public record 22 through trial or otherwise; and (b) any information known to the Receiving Party prior to the 23 disclosure or obtained by the Receiving Party after the disclosure from a source who obtained the 24 information lawfully and under no obligation of confidentiality to the Designating Party. Any use of 25 Protected Material at trial shall be governed by a separate agreement or order. 26 4.

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

Related

Pintos v. PACIFIC CREDITORS ASS'N
605 F.3d 665 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Pettus v. Cole
49 Cal. App. 4th 402 (California Court of Appeal, 1996)
Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC
809 F.3d 1092 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Negrete v. Amazon.com Services LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/negrete-v-amazoncom-services-llc-caed-2023.