Vanessa Lynn Taha v. Turk Hava Yollari A O

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedSeptember 16, 2025
Docket2:24-cv-08375
StatusUnknown

This text of Vanessa Lynn Taha v. Turk Hava Yollari A O (Vanessa Lynn Taha v. Turk Hava Yollari A O) 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
Vanessa Lynn Taha v. Turk Hava Yollari A O, (C.D. Cal. 2025).

Opinion

1 Kevin R. Sutherland (State Bar No. 163746) Autumn E. Lewis (State Bar No. 295584) 2 CLYDE & CO US LLP 3 355 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, California 90071 4 Telephone: (213) 358-7600 5 Facsimile: (213) 358-7650 Email: kevin.sutherland@clydeco.us 6 autumn.lewis@clydeco.us 7 Attorneys for Defendant 8 TURK HAVA YOLLARI, A.O. DBA 9 TURKISH AIRLINES

10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 VANESSA LYNN TAHA, an individual, ) Case No. 2:24-cv-08375-AB(AJRx)

) 13 Plaintiff, ) STIPULATION AND PROPOSED 14 ) PROTECTIVE ORDER

v. ) 15 ) 16 TURK HAVA YOLLARI, A.O., d/b/a ) TURKISH AIRLINES, INC., a foreign ) 17 company, and DOES 1 to 10, Inclusive, ) 18 ) ) 19 Defendants. ) 20 ) 21 22 1. GENERAL 23 1.1 Purposes and Limitations. Discovery in this action is likely to involve 24 production of confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special 25 protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than 26 prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby 27 stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated Protective 1 on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from 2 public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are 3 entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties 4 further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated 5 Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; 6 Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the 7 standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file 8 material under seal. 9 1.2 Good Cause Statement. This action is likely to involve trade secrets, 10 customer and pricing lists and other valuable research, development, commercial, 11 financial, technical and/or proprietary information for which special protection 12 from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this 13 action is warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials and information 14 consist of, among other things, confidential business or financial information, 15 information regarding confidential business practices, or other confidential 16 research, development, or commercial information (including information 17 implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise generally 18 unavailable to the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise protected from 19 disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common 20 law. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt 21 resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately 22 protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the 23 parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in preparation for 24 and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of the litigation, and 25 serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this 26 matter. It is the intent of the parties that information will not be designated as 27 confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good 1 there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of this case. 2 2. DEFINITIONS 3 2.1 Action: Vanessa Lynn Taha v. Turk Hava Yollari, A.O. dba Turkish 4 Airlines, Case No. 2:24-cv-08375-AB(AJRx). 5 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the 6 designation of information or items under this Order. 7 2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of 8 how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for 9 protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in 10 the Good Cause Statement. 11 2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as 12 their support staff). 13 2.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information 14 or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as 15 “CONFIDENTIAL.” 16 2.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless 17 of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, 18 among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced 19 or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. 20 2.7 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a 21 matter pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to 22 serve as an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 23 2.8 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this 24 Action. House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other 25 outside counsel. 26 2.9 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, 27 or other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. 1 2.10 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a 2 party to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this Action 3 and have appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law 4 firm that has appeared on behalf of that party, including support staff. 5 2.11 Party: any party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors, 6 employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their 7 support staffs). 8 2.12 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or 9 Discovery Material in this Action. 10 2.13 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation 11 support services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or 12 demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) 13 and their employees and subcontractors. 14 2.14 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is 15 designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 16 2.15 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery 17 Material from a Producing Party. 18 19 3. SCOPE 20 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only 21 Protected Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or 22 extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or 23 compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or 24 presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. 25 Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by the orders of the 26 trial judge. This Order does not govern the use of Protected Material at trial. 27 / / 1 4. DURATION 2 Once a case proceeds to trial, all of the court-filed information to be 3 introduced that was previously designated as confidential or maintained pursuant 4 to this protective order becomes public and will be presumptively available to all 5 members of the public, including the press, unless compelling reasons supported 6 by specific factual findings to proceed otherwise are made to the trial judge in 7 advance of the trial. See Kamakana v. City and Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 8 1180-81 (9th Cir. 2006) (distinguishing “good cause” showing for sealing 9 documents produced in discovery from “compelling reasons” standard when 10 merits-related documents are part of court record). Accordingly, the terms of this 11 protective order do not extend beyond the commencement of the trial. 12 13 5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL 14 5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection.

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

Related

Royston v. Horner
24 A. 25 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1892)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Vanessa Lynn Taha v. Turk Hava Yollari A O, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vanessa-lynn-taha-v-turk-hava-yollari-a-o-cacd-2025.