Samuel R. Navarette, Jr. v. County of San Barnardino

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedFebruary 2, 2022
Docket5:21-cv-02022
StatusUnknown

This text of Samuel R. Navarette, Jr. v. County of San Barnardino (Samuel R. Navarette, Jr. v. County of San Barnardino) 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
Samuel R. Navarette, Jr. v. County of San Barnardino, (C.D. Cal. 2022).

Opinion

Case 5:21-cv-02022-JWH-KK Document 15 Filed 02/02/22 Page 1 of 16 Page ID #:170

11 James R. Touchstone, SBN 184584 jrt@jones-mayer.com 22 Denise L. Rocawich, SBN 232792 dlr@jones-mayer.com 33 JONES & MAYER 3777 North Harbor Boulevard 44 Fullerton, CA 92835 Telephone: (714) 446-1400 55 Facsimile: (714) 446-1448 Attorneys for Defendants 66

77 Joseph M. Barrett, SBN 143974 jmb@agzlaw.com 88 Damion D. Robinson SBN 262573 99 dr@agzlaw.com David Markevitch SBN 256163 1100 dm@agzlaw.com 1111 AFFELD GRIVAKES LLP 2049 Century Park East Suite 2460 1122 Los Angeles, California 90067 1133 Telephone: (310) 979-8000 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 1144 1155 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1166 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

1177 Plaintiffs SAMUEL R. NAVARETTE, Case No.: CV21-02022 JWH (KK) 1188 JR,; SAMUEL R. NAVARETTE, SR.; Judge: Hon. Judge John W. Holcomb ANDREW NAVARETTE, A Minor, 1199 by and through his Guardian ad Litem, [PROPOSED] STIPULATED 2200 ROSE VIALPANDO; JESSICA PROTECTIVE ORDER NAVARETTE, A Minor, by and 2211 through his Guardian ad Litem; ROSE

2222 VIALPANDO; DANIEL [NOTE CHANGES BY COURT] NAVARETTE; JEANETTE 2233 ALAMEDA; JASMINE LYNES, Plaintiffs, 2244

2255 vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO; 2266 CITY OF VICTORVILLE; and DOES 2277 1-10, inclusive. Defendants. 2288 -1- [PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Case 5:21-cv-02022-JWH-KK Document 15 Filed 02/02/22 Page 2 of 16 Page ID #:171

11 [PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

22 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), Defendants, COUNTY 33 OF SAN BERNARDINO and CITY OF VICTORVILLE, and Plaintiffs 44 SAMUEL R. NAVARETTE, JR,, SAMUEL R. NAVARETTE, SR., ANDREW 55 NAVARETTE, a Minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, ROSE 66 VIALPANDO, JESSICA NAVARETTE, a Minor, by and through his Guardian ad 77 Litem, ROSE VIALPANDO, DANIEL NAVARETTE, JEANETTE ALAMEDA, 88 JASMINE LYNES (collectively "the Parties"), by their undersigned counsel, agree 99 to be bound to the terms of the following Protective Order. The Parties represent 1100 that pre-trial discovery in this case is likely to include the production of 1111 information and/or documents that are confidential and/or privileged including the 1122 production of peace officer personnel file information and/or documents which the 1133 Parties agree includes: (1) Personal data, including marital status, family members, 1144 educational and employment history, home addresses, or similar information; (2) 1155 Medical history; (3) Election of employee benefits; (4) Employee advancement, 1166 appraisal, or discipline; and (5) Complaints, or investigations of complaints, 1177 concerning an event or transaction in which a peace officer participated, or which a 1188 peace officer perceived, and pertaining to the manner in which the peace officer 1199 performed his or her duties including compelled statements by peace officers. 2200 Defendants contend that such information is privileged as official information. 2211 Sanchez v. City of Santa Ana, 936 F.2d 1027, 1033 (9th Cir. Cal. 1990); see also 2222 Kerr v. United States Dist. Ct. for N.D. Cal., 511 F.2d 192, 198 (9th Cir.1975), 2233 aff'd, 426 U.S. 394, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976). Further, discovery may 2244 require the production of certain San Bernardino County Sheriffs’ Office Policies 2255 and Procedures not available to the public and the public disclosure of which could 2266 comprise officer safety, raise security issues, and/or impede investigations. Peace 2277 officer personnel file information and/or documents and security-sensitive policies

2288 and procedures are hereinafter referred to as "Confidential Information". -2- [PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Case 5:21-cv-02022-JWH-KK Document 15 Filed 02/02/22 Page 3 of 16 Page ID #:172

11 Defendants contend that that public disclosure of such material poses a

22 substantial risk of embarrassment, oppression and/or physical harm to peace 33 officers whose Confidential Information is disclosed. The Parties further agree that 44 the risk of harm to peace officers is greater than with other government employees 55 due to the nature of their profession. Finally, the Defendants contend that the 66 benefit of public disclosure of Confidential Information is minimal while the 77 potential disadvantages are great. 88 Accordingly, good cause exists for entry of this Protective Order to facilitate 99 pre-trial disclosure while assuring the safety of these sensitive disclosures. See 1100 Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 26(c). 1111 SO STIPULATED 1122 Dated: January 31, 2022 Respectfully submitted, 1133 JONES & MAYER 1144 1155 By: /s/ Denise L. Rocawich 1166 JAMES R. TOUCHSTONE DENISE L. ROCAWICH 1177 Attorneys for Defendants 1188 1199 Dated: January 31, 2022 Respectfully submitted, 2200 AFFELD GRIVAKES LLP 2211

2222 By:/s/ David Markevitch 2233 DAVID MARKEVITCH 2244 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

2288 -3- [PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Case 5:21-cv-02022-JWH-KK Document 15 Filed 02/02/22 Page 4 of 16 Page ID #:173

11 [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER

22 PER THE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES AND GOOD CAUSE 33 APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the terms and conditions of this 44 Protective Order shall govern the handling of Discovery Materials containing 55 Confidential Information in matter of Navarette et al. v. County of San Bernardino 66 et al. USCD Case No. CV21-020221 JWH (KK) ("the Litigation"): 77 1. Applicability of Order: This Order does not and will not govern any 88 trial proceedings in this Litigation, but will otherwise be applicable to and govern 99 the handling of documents, depositions, deposition exhibits, interrogatory 1100 responses, responses to requests for admissions, responses to requests for 1111 production of documents, and all other discovery obtained pursuant to the Federal 1122 Rules of Civil Procedure by Plaintiff in connection with the Litigation (this 1133 information hereinafter referred to as “Discovery Material”). 1144 2. Designation of Material: Defendants may designate Discovery 1155 Material that is in their possession, custody or control to be produced to Plaintiff as 1166 “Confidential Information” under the terms of this Order if Defendants in good 1177 faith reasonably believe that such Discovery Material contains non-public, 1188 confidential material as defined in section 4 below. 1199 3. Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for 2200 Protection: When designating Discovery Material for protection as Confidential 2211 Information under this Order, Defendants must take care to limit any such 2222 designation to specific material that qualifies under the appropriate standards. 2233 Mass, indiscriminate, or routinized designations are prohibited. 2244 4. Confidential Information: For purposes of this Order, Confidential 2255 Information is any information and/or documents that Defendants believe in good 2266 faith to be Peace Officer Personnel File Information and/or Documents including: 2277 (1) Personal data, including marital status, family members, educational and

2288 employment history, home addresses, or similar information; (2) Medical history; -4- [PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Case 5:21-cv-02022-JWH-KK Document 15 Filed 02/02/22 Page 5 of 16 Page ID #:174

11 (3) Election of employee benefits; (4) Employee advancement, appraisal, or

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Samuel R. Navarette, Jr. v. County of San Barnardino, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/samuel-r-navarette-jr-v-county-of-san-barnardino-cacd-2022.