Sanchez v. Renown South Meadows Medical Center

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided October 26, 2021·No. 3:21-cv-00352·Unknown

Opinion

1 Arthur J. Bayer, Jr., Esq. Nevada Bar No. 01366 2 18124 Wedge Parkway, #404 Reno, Nevada 89511 3 Telephone: (775) 315-3838 abayerjr@aol.com 4 Luke Busby, Esq. 5 Nevada Bar No. 10319 316 California Ave. #82 6 Reno, Nevada 89509 (775) 453-0112 7 (775) 403-2192 (Fax) luke@lukeandrewbusbyltd.com 8 Attorneys for the Plaintiff 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 12 * * * 13 LUCERO SANCHEZ, 14 Plaintiff, Case No. 3:21-cv-00352-MMD-WGC 15 vs. 16 CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT RENOWN HEALTH, a Nevada Non-Profit AND STIPULATION FOR ENTRY 17 Corporation, and DOES 1-20, inclusive, OF A QUALIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDER 18 Defendant. 19 __________________________________/ 20 21 The undersigned agree as follows: 22 1. During the course of this litigation, a party may produce or disclose 23 documents, materials, and information (collectively, “Information”) which are 24 confidential, proprietary, trade secret, competitively sensitive, and/or contain personal 25 information, including personal health information as contemplated under the Health 26 Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”). Similarly, such 27 Information may be disclosed by written discovery, deposition testimony (to the extent 1 taken), or in other filings with the Court. Accordingly, the parties submit this 2 Confidentiality Agreement and Stipulation for Entry of a Qualified Protective Order (the 3 “Order”) for the approval and enforcement of the Court and hereby agree as follows: 4 2. All Information produced in this litigation and designated as 5 “Confidential” as provided below shall be used solely for the purpose of this litigation, 6 and will not be used or disclosed outside the context of this litigation. Any person 7 receiving such Information designated as Confidential shall restrict its disclosure to 8 persons authorized to receive the Information designated as “Confidential” pursuant 9 to this Order. A Confidential designation is applicable to all copies and reproductions 10 of any Information. Nothing herein shall be deemed to restrict the right of the 11 producing party to use its own Information that it has designated as Confidential as it 12 chooses. Nothing in this Order requires either party to produce Information the party 13 believes is privileged or otherwise non-discoverable. By entering into this Order, the 14 parties do not waive any right to object to any discovery request, to the admission of 15 evidence on any ground, to seek further protective order, or to seek relief from the 16 Court from any provision of this Order. 17 3. Definition of Confidential Information: A producing party may designate 18 as Confidential such Information which the producing party believes in good faith 19 constitutes, contains, or reflects personal health information, financial information 20 about a party or other person, personnel information, proprietary, trade secret, and/or 21 competitively sensitive business information, or other information that is not generally 22 known to the public. 23 4. Designating Information as Confidential: All or any part of a document, 24 item, testimony, or other Information disclosed, produced, or filed in this litigation may 25 be designated as Confidential by marking the word “Confidential” on the face of the 26 original of the document and each page so designated, or on the face of the photocopy 27 of the document, and on the photocopies of each page so designated, except as to 1 top page as Confidential will suffice. Oral testimony may be designated as 2 Confidential during the deposition or proceeding, with reasonable precision as to the 3 affected testimony, or within seven (7) business days after receipt of the transcript of 4 such deposition or proceeding by sending written notice designating, by page and 5 line, the portions of the transcript of the deposition or other testimony to be treated as 6 Confidential. All or any part of responses to interrogatories or to requests for 7 admission or for production of documents may be designated as Confidential on the 8 face of the response and each page so designated. 9 In addition to the foregoing, the parties agree that any personal health 10 information obtained pursuant to a medical release, whether such release is executed 11 by a party to this litigation or by a third party, shall be automatically designated 12 Confidential. After any such personal health information is obtained pursuant to a 13 medical release, the parties shall mark the word “Confidential” on the face of the 14 original of the document and each page so designated, or on the face of the photocopy 15 of the document, and on the photocopies of each page so designated, except as to 16 documents containing more than twenty-five (25) pages, in which case marking the 17 top page as Confidential will suffice. 18 5. Challenging a Designation: Either party may challenge at any time the 19 propriety of a designation of Information as Confidential. Before seeking relief from 20 the Court, the parties shall attempt to resolve the dispute informally and in good faith. 21 If the parties are unable to resolve such dispute, it shall be submitted to the Court. 22 The Information shall be treated as Confidential pending resolution of the challenge. 23 6. No Implied Acknowledgement of Confidentiality: Compliance with the 24 terms of this Order, production or receipt of Information designated Confidential, 25 and/or allowing Information to be designated Confidential shall not in any way operate 26 as an admission that any particular Information is Confidential. Failure to challenge 27 the designation of Information as Confidential does not preclude a subsequent 1 challenge. The designation of Information as Confidential does not create a 2 presumption in favor of or against that designation. 3 7. Access to Information Designated Confidential: Access to Information 4 designated Confidential is restricted to the following persons: 5 (a) Counsel of record for the respective parties, including office associates, 6 paralegals, stenographic and clerical employees; 7 (b) The parties to this action and their representatives, including in-house 8 counsel; 9 (c) Experts or consultants (including their employees, associates, and/or 10 support staff) who are employed, retained or otherwise consulted by counsel or a party 11 for the purpose of analyzing data, conducting studies, or providing opinions to assist 12 in any way in the litigation. Information designated Confidential that is accessed by 13 experts or consultants shall be limited to documents that the experts or consultants 14 reasonably need to review in their roles as experts or consultants; 15 (d) Electronic imaging and/or computer litigation support personnel retained 16 by one or more of the parties in this litigation or by the parties’ counsel; 17 (e) The Court and its personnel, including clerks and stenographic reporters 18 who record deposition of other testimony in this litigation; 19 (f) Outside photocopying services, graphic production services, or litigation 20 support services employed by the parties or their counsel to assist in this litigation, 21 and computer personnel performing duties in relation to a computerized litigation 22 system; and 23 (g) Any other person to whom the producing party agrees in writing. 24 Counsel shall inform each person to whom they disclose or give access to the 25 other party’s Information designated Confidential of the terms of this Order, as well as 26 the obligation to comply with its terms. 27 8. Depositions: To the extent depositions occur in this litigation, persons 1 been designated Confidential.

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

Sanchez v. Renown South Meadows Medical Center, (D. Nev. 2021).

Sanchez v. Renown South Meadows Medical Center (Sanchez v. Renown South Meadows Medical Center) — 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)
United States v. Lowell M. Birrell
447 F.2d 1168 (Second Circuit, 1971)
Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC
809 F.3d 1092 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)