State of Washington v. United States Department of Homeland Security

District Court, E.D. Washington·Decided December 17, 2020·No. 4:19-cv-05210·Unknown

Opinion

1 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

Dec 17, 2020 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK 3

4 STATE OF WASHINGTON; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; NO: 4:19-CV-5210-RMP 5 STATE OF COLORADO; STATE OF DELAWARE; STATE OF 6 ILLINOIS; COMMONWEALTH OF STIPULATED PROTECTIVE MASSACHUSETTS; DANA ORDER 7 NESSEL, Attorney General on behalf of the people of Michigan; STATE OF 8 MINNESOTA; STATE OF NEVADA; STATE OF NEW 9 JERSEY; STATE OF NEW MEXICO; STATE OF RHODE 10 ISLAND; STATE OF MARYLAND; STATE OF HAWAI’I, 11 Plaintiffs, 12 v. 13 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT 14 OF HOMELAND SECURITY, a federal agency; CHAD F. WOLF, in 15 his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the United States 16 Department of Homeland Security; UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP 17 AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, a federal agency; KENNETH T. 18 CUCCINELLI, II, in his official capacity as Senior Official Performing 19 the Duties of Director for United States Citizenship and Immigration 20 Services,

21 Defendants. 1 BEFORE THE COURT is a Joint Motion for Entry of a Stipulated 2 Protective Order, ECF No. 272. A district court may issue protective orders 3 regarding discovery upon a showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). Before 4 issuing a stipulated protective order, a district court judge should ensure that the

5 protective order’s restrictions do not infringe on the public’s general right to 6 inspect and copy judicial records and documents. See Kamakana v. City and Cty. 7 of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006); see also Courthouse News Serv.

8 v. Planet, 947 F.3d 581, 589 (9th Cir. 2020) (recognizing a long-held First 9 Amendment right of access to court proceedings and documents). 10 Having reviewed the protective order and the remaining record, the Court 11 finds good cause to grant the stipulated motion and enter the agreed-upon

12 protective order. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties’ 13 motion for entry of a stipulated protective order, ECF No. 272, is GRANTED. 14 The protective order in effect is set forth below.

15 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER The Plaintiffs and Defendants to this action move that the Court enter a 16 protective order. ECF No. 272. The Court has determined that the terms set forth 17 herein are appropriate to protect the respective interests of the parties, the public, 18 and the Court. 19 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED: 20 1. Scope. All materials produced or adduced in the course of discovery, 21 including initial disclosures, responses to discovery requests, deposition testimony 1 “documents”), shall be subject to this Order concerning Confidential Information 2 as defined below. This Order is subject to the Local Rules of this District and the 3 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on matters of procedure and calculation of time 4 periods. 2. Confidential Information. As used in this Order, “Confidential Information” 5 means information designated as “CONFIDENTIAL-SUBJECT TO 6 PROTECTIVE ORDER” by the producing party that falls within one or more of 7 the following categories: (a) information prohibited from disclosure by statute, 8 including the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, et seq., and federal regulations 9 (including non-public information that is For Official Use Only or is Law 10 Enforcement Sensitive), or information that would be covered by the Privacy Act if 11 the subject of the information had been a U.S. citizen or a person lawfully admitted for permanent residence;1 (b) information protected from disclosure under the 12 Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, et seq., (c) information that may 13 disclose or contain information of certain of Plaintiffs’ witnesses who may have a 14 fear of removal or immigration enforcement, (d) the personally identifying 15 information of current or former government employees below the senior 16 executive level; (e) contact information, including email addresses and telephone 17 numbers, of current or former government employees; (f) any other documents or

18 1 Subject to the requirements of this Order, in connection with the production of 19 records in this case, Defendants are authorized to release government records, documents, and other information, including computerized or electronic 20 information, that are protected from disclosure by the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 522a, or whose disclosure might otherwise intrude upon the privacy 21 interests of third parties, without obtaining the prior written consent of the 1 information that qualify for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 2 26(c). Information or documents that are available to the public may not be 3 designated as Confidential Information. 4 3. Designation. a. A party may designate a document as Confidential Information for 5 protection under this Order by placing or affixing the words 6 “CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER” on the 7 document and on all copies in a manner that will not interfere with the 8 legibility of the document. As used in this Order, “copies” includes 9 electronic images, duplicates, extracts, summaries or descriptions that 10 contain the Confidential Information. The marking “CONFIDENTIAL - 11 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER” shall be applied prior to or at the time of the documents are produced or disclosed. Applying the marking 12 “CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER” to a 13 document does not mean that the document has any status or protection 14 by statute or otherwise except to the extent and for the purposes of this 15 Order. Any copies that are made of any documents marked 16 “CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER” shall also 17 be so marked, except that indices, electronic databases or lists of documents that do not contain substantial portions or images of the text 18 of marked documents and do not otherwise disclose the substance of the 19 Confidential Information are not required to be marked. 20 4. The designation of a document as Confidential Information is a certification 21 by an attorney or a party appearing pro se that the document contains Confidential 1 Information as defined in this order. Depositions. 2 Unless all parties agree on the record at the time the deposition testimony is 3 taken, all deposition testimony taken in this case shall presumptively be treated as 4 Confidential Information until no later than the fourteenth day after the transcript is delivered to any party or the witness. Within this time period, a party may serve a 5 Notice of Designation to all parties of record as to specific portions of the 6 testimony that are designated Confidential Information, and thereafter only those 7 portions identified in the Notice of Designation shall be protected by the terms of 8 this Order. The failure to serve a timely Notice of Designation shall waive any 9 designation of testimony taken in that deposition as Confidential Information, 10 unless otherwise ordered by the Court. 11 5. Protection of Confidential Material. a. General Protections. Confidential Information shall not be used or 12 disclosed by the parties, counsel for the parties or any other persons 13 identified in subparagraph (b) for any purpose whatsoever other than for 14 use by the parties in this litigation, including any appeal thereof. 15 b. Limited Third-Party Disclosures.

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

State of Washington v. United States Department of Homeland Security, (E.D. Wash. 2020).

State of Washington v. United States Department of Homeland Security (State of Washington v. United States Department of Homeland Security) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related