Rodriguez v. NAPH Care

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided March 22, 2022·No. 3:21-cv-00185·Unknown

Opinion

I || CHAD C. COUCHOT Nevada Bar No. 12946 2 || SCHUERING ZIMMERMAN & DOYLE, LLP 400 University Avenue 3 || Sacramento, California 95825-6502 (916) 567-0400 4 || FAX: 568-0400 5 || AIMEE CLARK NEWBERRY Nevada Bar No. 11084 6 || CLARK NEWBERRY 4108S. Rampart Blvd., Suite 390, Office #308, 7 || Las vegas, V 89145 3 (702) 608-4232 pitomeys for Defendants NAPHCARE, INC.; ELOY ITUARTE, M.D.; PORSCHE 9 || HILL, RN AND FRANK AKPATI, NP (ERRONEOUSLY NAMED AS FRANK AKPATY) 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

13 || JOSE ANTONIO RODRIGUEZ, No. 3:21-cv-00185-MMD-CSD 14 Plaintiff, STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 15 jl vs. 16 || NAPHCARE, INC.; FRANK AKPATY, NP; PORSCHE HILL, RN; ELOY ITUARTE, M.D.; 17 | WASHOE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT.; AND ] Defendants. 19 20 21 Plaintiff seeks to obtain, inspect and copy documents and/or things which 22 || Defendants NAPHCARE, INC.; ELOY ITUARTE, M.D.; PORSCHE HILL, RN AND 23 || FRANK AKPATI, NP (hereinafter “NAPHCARE”) contends contains private and 94 || sensitive information, confidential information of NAPHCARE, its officers and 25 || employees, its internal investigative and administrative actions, and other 26 || confidential information. Pursuant to an agreement by the Parties, the Court hereby 27 || enters the following Order for Protection (Protective Order): 28 □ //

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER □□□

I TERMS OF PROTECTIVE ORDER 3 The following definitions apply to the Protective Order: 4 1. Party. Any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, 5 || employees, consultants, Experts, and Outside Counsel. 6 2. Disclosure or Discovery Material. All items or information, regardless of 7 || the medium or manner generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other 8 || things, testimony, transcripts, or tangible things) that are produced or generated 9 | in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. 10 3. "Confidential" Information or Items. Information (regardless of how 11 || generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under 12. {| the law enforcement investigative and/or official information privileges, or that 13 || contain Criminal History Information, personal information regarding individuals 14 || including Social Security Numbers, dates of birth and information which a person 15. || would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Confidential information shall also 16 | include information concerning, regarding, or as a result of covert or undercover 17 || law enforcement investigation(s) technique(s), method(s) or source(s), including 18 || the identity of any confidential informant, intelligence report, undercover officer 19 |l information, or information referring to any undercover or active criminal 20 || investigations. Further, Confidential information shall also include any information 21 || protected from disclosure under Donrey v. Bradshaw, 106 Nev. 630 (1990) or an 92 |l official or executive information privilege. Confidential information shall also 23 || include employee information, employee medical information, and employee 24 || disciplinary action, including any internal investigation concerning employee 25 || actions. 26 4, Receiving Party. A Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material or 27. || Confidential Information from a Producing Party. 28 5. Producing Party. A Party or third-party that produces Disclosure or

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER -2-

1 || Discovery Material or Confidential Information in this action. 2 6. Designating Party. A Party or third-party that designates information or 3 || items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as "Confidential." 4 7. Protected Material. Any Disclosure or Discovery Material or Confidential 5 | Information that is designated as "Confidential." 6 8. Outside Counsel. Attorneys who are not employees of a Party but who 7 ‘| areretained to represent or advise a Party in this action. 8 9. House Counsel. Attorneys who are employees of a Party. 9 10. Counsel (without qualifier). Outside Counsel and House Counsel (as 10 || well as their support staffs). 11. Expert. A person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter 12 || pertinent to the litigation retained by a Party or its Counsel to serve as an expert 13 || witness or as a consultant in this action. This definition includes, but is not limited 14 || to,a professional jury or trial consultant retained in connection with this litigation. 15 12. Professional Vendor. Person or entity that provides litigation support 16 || services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or 17. || demonstrations, organizing, storing, retrieving data in any form or medium; etc.) 18 || and its employees and subcontractors. 19 13. The use of the singular form of any word includes the plural, and vice 20 | versa. 21 iI. SCOPE 22 The protection conferred by this Protective Order covers not only Protected 23 || Material, but also any information copied or extracted therefrom, as well as all 24 || copies excerpts, summaries, or compilations thereof, testimony, conversations, or 25 || presentations by parties or counsel to or in court or in other settings that might 26 || reveal Protected Material. 27 Ill. DURATION 28 Even after the termination of this action, the confidentiality obligations

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER -3-

1 || imposed by this Protective Order shall remain in effect until a Designating Party 2 {| agrees otherwise in writing or a court order otherwise directs. 4 1, Manner and Timing of Designations. Except as otherwise provided herein, 5 | or as otherwise ordered, material that qualifies for protection under this Order 6 || must be clearly designated before it is disclosed or produced. Designations in 7 | conformity with this Order require: 8 a. For information in documentary form. That the Producing Party shall affix 9 || the legend "Confidential" on each page that contains Protected Material. If only a 10 || portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 11 |Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 12 || appropriate makings in the margins or redacting protected portions). A Producing 13 || Party that makes original documents or materials available for inspection need not 14 | designate them for protection until after the inspecting Party has indicated which 15. || material it would like copied and produced. During the inspection and before the 16 || designation, all of the material made available for inspection shall be deemed 17 || "Confidential." After the inspecting Party has identified the documents it wants 18 || copied and produced, the Producing Party must determine which documents, or 19 | portions thereof, qualify for protection under this Order, and, before producing the 20 || specified documents, the Producing Party must affix the appropriate legend on 21 || each page that contains Protected Material. If only a portion or portions of the 22 || material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 23 |l identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriated markings in the 24 | margins or by redacting protected portions). 25 b. For testimony given in deposition or in other pretrial or trial proceedings. 26 || That before the close of the deposition, hearing, or other proceeding, the Party or 97 || non-party offering or sponsoring the testimony shall identify on the record all 28 || protected testimony and further specify any portions of the testimony that qualify

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER -4-

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

Rodriguez v. NAPH Care, (D. Nev. 2022).

Rodriguez v. NAPH Care (Rodriguez v. NAPH Care) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Donrey of Nevada, Inc. v. Bradshaw
798 P.2d 144 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1990)
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)