Quesada v. Marten Transport, Ltd

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. California
DecidedJune 25, 2024
Docket2:23-cv-00311
StatusUnknown

This text of Quesada v. Marten Transport, Ltd (Quesada v. Marten Transport, Ltd) 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
Quesada v. Marten Transport, Ltd, (E.D. Cal. 2024).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RAMON QUESADA, Case No. 2:23-cv-311-DAD-CSK Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MODIFIED 13 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 14 (ECF No. 106) MARTEN TRANSPORT, LTD et al., Defendants. 16 17 The Court has reviewed the parties’ stipulated protective order below (ECF No. 106), 18 || and finds it comports with the relevant authorities and the Court’s Local Rule. See L.R. 19 || 141.1. The Court APPROVES the protective order, subject to the following clarification. The 20 || Court’s Local Rules indicate that once an action is closed, it “will not retain jurisdiction over 21 || enforcement of the terms of any protective order filed in that action.” L.R. 141.1(f); see MD 22 || Helicopters, Inc. v. Aerometals, Inc., 2017 WL 495778 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 3, 2017) (noting that 23 || courts in the district generally do not retain jurisdiction for disputes concerning protective 24 || orders after closure of the case). Thus, the Court will not retain jurisdiction over this 25 || protective order once the case is closed. 26 Dated: June 24, 2024 27 Cina Spo GHI 500 KIM 28 sues UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1 2

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7

8 9 RAMON QUESADA, Ca se No. 2:23-cv-00311-DAD-CSK

10 Plaintiff, v. STIPULATED PROTECTIVE 11 ORDER MARTEN TRANSPORT, LTD.,1 12 MARTEN TRANSPORT SERVICES, 13 LTD., ANN BAUER, TABETHA2 Trial Date: 5/12/2025 CRANDALL, JEFFREY GREILING, and 14 DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Second Amended Complaint Filed: 15 1/10/2024 Defendants. 16

17 A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 18 Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, 19 proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure 20 and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. 21 Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following 22 Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer 23 blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection 24 it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items 25 that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The 26 27 1 To the best of Defendant Marten Transport, Ltd.’s knowledge, there is no corporate entity known 1 parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated 2 Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Civil 3 Local Rule 141 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that 4 will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal. 5 B. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT 6 This action is likely to involve information or documents that contain proprietary, 7 confidential business, financial, trade secret, and/or commercially sensitive 8 information, individualized personal information of Plaintiff, including Plaintiff’s 9 personnel file, compensation and benefits information, and medical records and medical 10 information, and personal, private, or sensitive information of non-parties, for which 11 special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than 12 prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials 13 and information consist of, among other things, confidential business or financial 14 information, information regarding confidential business practices, or other confidential 15 business and personnel information (including information implicating privacy rights 16 of third parties), plaintiffs personal text messages, and financial documents such as tax 17 forms, information otherwise generally unavailable to the public (including insurance 18 policies), or which may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under state 19 or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. Accordingly, to expedite 20 the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over 21 confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information the parties are 22 entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable 23 necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address 24 their handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order 25 for such information is justified in this matter. It is the intent of the parties that 26 information will not be designated as confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing 27 be so designated without a good faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, 1 non-public manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public 2 record of this case. 3 2. DEFINITIONS 4 2.1 Action: the above-entitled proceeding, captioned as Ramon Quesada v. 5 Marten Transport, Ltd., Marten Transport Services, Ltd., Ann Bauer, Tabetha Crandall, 6 and Jeffrey Greiling, Case No. 2:23-cv-00311-DAD-CSK, pending in the United States 7 District Court for the Eastern District of California. 8 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of 9 information or items under this Order. 10 2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how 11 it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under 12 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in the Good Cause 13 Statement. 14 2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record (as well as their support staff). 15 2.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or 16 items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as 17 “CONFIDENTIAL.” 18 2.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of 19 the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among 20 other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated 21 in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. 22 2.7 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter 23 pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an 24 expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 25 2.8 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or 26 other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. 27 2.9 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a party to 1 appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which 2 has appeared on behalf of that party, and includes support staff. 3 2.10 Party: any party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors, 4 employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their 5 support staffs). 6 2.11 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or 7 Discovery Material in this Action. 8 2.12 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support 9 services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or 10 demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and 11 their employees and subcontractors. 12 2.13 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is 13 designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 14 2.14 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material 15 from a Producing Party. 16 3.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Quesada v. Marten Transport, Ltd, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/quesada-v-marten-transport-ltd-caed-2024.