Quezada v. State of California

District Court, E.D. California·Decided February 6, 2023·No. 1:20-cv-00959·Unknown

Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 JOSE MIGUEL QUEZADA, Case No. 1:20-cv-00959-ADA-SAB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER ENTERING STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 13 v. (ECF No. 42) 14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 21 1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 22 Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to involve production of 23 confidential, privileged, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from 24 public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be 25 warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the court to enter the 26 following Stipulated Proposed Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not 27 confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it 28 affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are 1 entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties further 2 acknowledge that this Stipulated Proposed Protective Order does not entitle them to file 3 confidential information under seal and that the local rules set forth the procedures that must be 4 followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to 5 file material under seal. 6 2. DEFINITIONS 7 2.1 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of 8 information or items under this Order. 9 2.2 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is 10 generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule 11 of Civil Procedure 26(c). 12 2.3 Counsel: Counsel of Record for the parties and the support staff for such counsel. 13 2.4 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that 14 it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY 15 CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”. 16 2.5 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the 17 medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, 18 testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or 19 responses to discovery in this matter. 20 2.6 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to 21 the litigation who (1) has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or 22 as a consultant in this action, (2) is not a past or current employee of a Party or of a Party’s 23 competitor, and (3) at the time of retention, is not anticipated to become an employee of a Party 24 or of a Party’s competitor. 25 2.7 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” Information or 26 Items: extremely sensitive “Confidential Information or Items,” disclosure of which to another 27 Party or Non-Party would create a substantial risk of serious harm that could not be avoided by 28 less restrictive means. “Attorneys” shall be limited to the Counsel in this case, their support staff, 1 and Expert(s). 2 2.8 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal 3 entity not named as a Party to this action. 4 2.9 Party: any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, 5 consultants, retained experts, and Counsel (and their support staffs). 6 2.10 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery 7 Material in this action. 8 2.11 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services 9 (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and 10 organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and 11 subcontractors. 12 2.12 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as 13 “CONFIDENTIAL,” or as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” 14 2.13 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a 15 Producing Party. 16 3. SCOPE 17 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material 18 (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) 19 all copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, 20 conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. 21 However, the protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order do not cover the following 22 information: (a) any information that is in the public domain at the time of disclosure to a 23 Receiving Party or becomes part of the public domain after its disclosure to a Receiving Party as 24 a result of publication not involving a violation of this Order, including becoming part of the 25 public record through trial or otherwise; and (b) any information known to the Receiving Party 26 prior to the disclosure or obtained by the Receiving Party after the disclosure from a source who 27 obtained the information lawfully and under no obligation of confidentiality to the Designating 28 Party. Protected material includes documents identified as “Confidential” or “Highly 1 Confidential” prior to the date of executing this protective order. Any use of Protected Material 2 at trial shall be governed by a separate agreement or order. 3 4. DURATION 4 Even after final disposition of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations imposed by 5 this Order shall remain in effect until a Designating Party agrees otherwise in writing or a court 6 order otherwise directs. Final disposition shall be deemed to be the later of (1) dismissal of all 7 claims and defenses in this action, with or without prejudice; and (2) final judgment herein after 8 the completion and exhaustion of all appeals, rehearings, remands, trials, or reviews of this action, 9 including the time limits for filing any motions or applications for extension of time pursuant to 10 applicable law. 11 5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL 12 5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection. Each Party 13 or Non-Party that designates information or items for protection under this Order must take care 14 to limit any such designation to specific material that qualifies under the appropriate standards. 15 To the extent it is practical to do so, the Designating Party must designate for protection only 16 those parts of material, documents, items, or oral or written communications that qualify – so that 17 other portions of the material, documents, items, or communications for which protection is not 18 warranted are not swept unjustifiably within the ambit of this Order. 19 Mass, indiscriminate, or routinized designations are prohibited. Designations that are 20 shown to be clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper purpose (e.g., to 21 unnecessarily encumber or retard the case development process or to impose unnecessary 22 expenses and burdens on other parties) could expose the Designating Party to sanctions under 23 applicable legal standards. 24 If it comes to a Designating Party’s attention that information or items that it designated 25 for protection do not qualify for protection at all or do not qualify for the level of protection 26 initially asserted, that Designating Party must promptly notify all other parties that it is 27 withdrawing the mistaken designation. 28 5.2 Manner and Timing of Designations. Except as otherwise provided in this Order, 1 or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, Disclosure or Discovery Material that qualifies for 2 protection under this Order must be clearly so designated before the material is disclosed or 3 produced.

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

Quezada v. State of California, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

Quezada v. State of California (Quezada v. State of California) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pintos v. PACIFIC CREDITORS ASS'N
605 F.3d 665 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC
809 F.3d 1092 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)