Raquel Martin v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedJanuary 9, 2023
Docket2:22-cv-06240
StatusUnknown

This text of Raquel Martin v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. (Raquel Martin v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Raquel Martin v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., (C.D. Cal. 2023).

Opinion

Case 2:22-cv-06240-RGK-JEM Document 20 Filed 01/09/23 Page 1 of 16 Page ID #:208 NOTE CHANGES MADE TO THIS DOCUMENT BY THE 1 Anita Grace Edwards (SBN 189468) COURT anita@agedwardslaw.com 2 LAW OFFICES OF ANITA GRACE EDWARDS 3811 Long Beach Blvd., Ste. A 3 Long Beach, CA 90807 (562) 490-3825 4 Attorney for Plaintiff Raquel Martin 5 6 Jessica M. Iglesias (SBN 280484) iglesias@sanchez-amador.com 7 SANCHEZ & AMADOR, LLP 800 S. Figueroa Street, 11th Floor 8 Los Angeles, California 90017 (213) 955-7200 Tel 9 (213) 955-7201 Fax 10 Attorneys for Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 11 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION 14 15 RAQUEL MARTIN, an individual, Case No. 2:22-cv-06240 RGK(JEMx) 16 Plaintiff, STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 17 v. 18 JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC., a corporation and DOES 1 19 THROUGH 25, inclusive, 20 Defendants. 21 22 I. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 23 A. Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, 24 proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public 25 disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may 26 be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to 27 enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this 28 Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to 434009.1 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Case 2:22-cv-06240-RGK-JEM Document 20 Filed 01/09/23 Page 2 of 16 Page ID #:209

1 discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends 2 only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment 3 under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth 4 in Section XIII(C), below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them 5 to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the 6 procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party 7 seeks permission from the Court to file material under seal. 8 II. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT 9 This action is likely to involve confidential commercial, personnel, 10 proprietary, and personal medical information for which special protection from 11 public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this action 12 is warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials and information consist of, 13 among other things, information regarding confidential recruitment practices, or 14 other confidential research, development, or commercial information (including 15 information implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise 16 generally unavailable to the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise 17 protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, 18 or common law. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the 19 prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to 20 adequately protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure 21 that the parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in 22 preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of the 23 litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is 24 justified in this matter. It is the intent of the parties that information will not be 25 designated as confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated 26 without a good faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, non-public 27 manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of this 28 case. 434009.1 2 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Case 2:22-cv-06240-RGK-JEM Document 20 Filed 01/09/23 Page 3 of 16 Page ID #:210

1 III. DEFINITIONS 2 A. Action: Raquel Martin v. Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., Case No. 3 2:22-cv-06240 RGK(JEMx). 4 B. Challenging Party: A Party or Non-Party that challenges the 5 designation of information or items under this Order. 6 C. “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: Information (regardless of 7 how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for 8 protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in 9 the Good Cause Statement. 10 D. Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as 11 their support staff). 12 E. Designating Party: A Party or Non-Party that designates information or 13 items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as 14 “CONFIDENTIAL.” 15 F. Disclosure or Discovery Material: All items or information, regardless 16 of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, 17 among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or 18 generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. 19 G. Expert: A person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter 20 pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as 21 an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 22 H. House Counsel: Attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action. 23 House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside 24 counsel. 25 I. Non-Party: Any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, 26 or other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. 27 J. Outside Counsel of Record: Attorneys who are not employees of a 28 party to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this Action and 434009.1 3 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Case 2:22-cv-06240-RGK-JEM Document 20 Filed 01/09/23 Page 4 of 16 Page ID #:211

1 have appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm 2 which has appeared on behalf of that party, and includes support staff. 3 K. 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 L. Producing Party: A Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or 7 Discovery Material in this Action. 8 M. Professional Vendors: Persons or entities that provide litigation 9 support services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or 10 demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) 11 and their employees and subcontractors. 12 N. Protected Material: Any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is 13 designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 14 O. Receiving Party: A Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery 15 Material from a Producing Party. 16 IV. SCOPE 17 A. The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only 18 Protected Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or 19 extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or 20 compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or 21 presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. 22 B. Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by the orders of 23 the trial judge. This Order does not govern the use of Protected Material at trial. 24 V. DURATION 25 Once a case proceeds to trial, all of the information that was designated as 26 confidential or maintained pursuant to this Protective Order becomes public and will 27 be presumptively available to all members of the public, including the press, unless 28 compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings to proceed otherwise are 434009.1 4 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Case 2:22-cv-06240-RGK-JEM Document 20 Filed 01/09/23 Page 5 of 16 Page ID #:212

1 made to the trial judge in advance of the trial. See Kamakana v.

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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Raquel Martin v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raquel-martin-v-jacobs-engineering-group-inc-cacd-2023.