Whittingham v. Attorney General's Office

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided July 26, 2021·No. 2:20-cv-00811·Unknown

Opinion

Nevada Attorney General MICHELLE DI SILVESTRO ALANIS (Bar No. 10024) Supervising Senior Deputy Attorney General GERALD L. TAN (Bar No. 13596) Deputy Attorney General Office of the Attorney General 555 E. Washington Ave., Ste. 3900 Las Vegas, NV 89101 Telephone: (702) 486-3268 Facsimile: (702) 486-3773 E-Mail: malanis@ag.nv.gov gtan@ag.nv.gov Attorneys for Defendants Attorney General’s Office and David O’Hara BYFORD “PETER” WHITTINGHAM, an CASE NO. 2:20-cv-00811-GMN-EJY individual, Plaintiff, STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER vs. THE STATE OF NEVADA, ex. rel. NEVADA ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE, a Subdivision of the State of Nevada; DAVID O’HARA, an Individual, JANE DOE an Individual; DOES 1-50; inclusive, Defendants. Defendant, ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE by and through its attorneys, Aaron D. Ford, Attorney General for the State of Nevada, Michelle Di Silvestro Alanis, Supervising Senior Deputy Attorney General, and Gerald L. Tan, Deputy Attorney General, and Plaintiff, BYFORD “PETER” WHITTINGHAM, by and through his counsel of record, Jenny Foley, Esq. and Dana Sniegocki, Esq. of HKM Employment Attorneys, LLP, hereby stipulate to the following terms of this Stipulated Protective Order to protect the confidentiality of confidential information obtained by the parties in connection with this case: 1. Confidential Information. Any party or non-party may designate as “CONFIDENTIAL” (by stamping the relevant page or otherwise set forth herein) any document or including, but not limited to, trade secrets, proprietary data, marketing information, financial information, personnel information, and/or similar commercially sensitive information of the type contemplated by Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or Nevada law. Where a document or response consists of more than one page, the first page and each page on which confidential information appears shall be so designated. 2. Designating Material as Confidential. A party or non-party may designate information disclosed during a deposition or in response to written discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL” by so indicating in said response. Or a party or non-party may designate in writing, within thirty (30) days after receipt of said responses or of the deposition transcript for which the designation is proposed, that specific pages of the transcript and/or specific responses be treated as confidential information. Any other party may object to such proposal, in writing or on the record. Upon such objection, the parties shall follow the procedures described in paragraph 9 below. After any designation made according to the procedure set forth in this paragraph, the designated documents or information shall be treated according to the designation until the matter is resolved according to the procedures described in paragraph 11 below, and counsel for all parties shall be responsible for making all previously unmarked copies of the designated material in their possession or control with the specific designation. 3. Use of Confidential Information. All information produced or exchanged in the course of this case (other than information that is publicly available) shall be used by the party or parties to whom the information is produced solely for the purpose of this case. 4. Disclosure of Confidential Information. Except with the prior written consent of other parties, or upon the prior order of this Court obtained upon notice to opposing counsel, confidential information shall not be disclosed to any person other than: a. counsel for the respective parties to this litigation and co-counsel retained for this litigation, including partners and associates who assist them in this matter, Chief Deputy Attorneys General, Senior Deputy Attorneys General, Deputy Attorneys General, paralegals, clerical and secretarial staff employed by such counsel; deemed necessary by counsel for the prosecution or defense of this litigation; c. non-party consultants or expert witnesses retained for the prosecution or defense of this litigation, provided that each such person shall execute a copy of the Certification annexed to this Order as Exhibit “A” (which shall be retained by counsel to the party so disclosing the confidential information and made available for inspection by opposing counsel during the pendency or after the termination of the action only upon good cause shown and upon order of the Court) before being shown or given any confidential information; d. any authors or recipients of the confidential information; e. the Court (under seal), Court personnel, court reporters, and videographers; f. witnesses (other than persons described in paragraph 4(e)). A witness shall sign the Certification before being shown a confidential document. Confidential information may be disclosed to a witness who will not sign the Certification only in a deposition at which the party who designated the confidential information is represented or has been given notice that confidential information shall be designated “Confidential” pursuant to paragraph 2 above. Witnesses shown confidential information shall not be allowed to retain copies. g. Members of the jury in this case; h. Professional vendors that provide litigation support services, employees of independent copy services, printers or illustrators, for the sole purpose of making copies of documents and exhibits to be used in this litigation; i. Such other persons as Plaintiff and Defendant may agree upon in writing; and j. Such other persons as the Court may order upon application of Plaintiff or Defendant. 5. Notice of Stipulated Protective Order. Any persons receiving confidential information shall be advised that the confidential information is being disclosed pursuant to an Order of the Court and that they shall not reveal or discuss such information to or with any person who is not entitled to receive such information, except as set forth herein. / / / court order, papers filed with the Court under seal shall be accompanied by a contemporaneous motion for leave to file those documents under seal, and shall be filed consistent with Local Rule IA 10-5 and the court’s electronic filing procedures in accordance with Nevada’s Policy for Handling Filed, Lodged and Presumptively Confidential Documents. Notwithstanding any agreement among the parties, the party seeking to file a paper under seal bears the burden of overcoming the presumption in favor of public access to papers filed in court. See Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.2d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006); Pintos v. Pac. Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2010). Further, pursuant to Local Rule IA 10-5(d), documents filed under seal in this case must be served in accordance with Local Rule IC 4-1(c). 7. Use of Confidential Information in Pretrial Proceedings. In the event that any confidential information is used in any pretrial Court proceeding in this action, it shall not lose its confidential status throughout such use. The party using such confidential information shall take all reasonable steps to maintain its confidentiality during such use, including, without limitation, requesting that the Court seal any transcript with respect to such proceeding. 8. Confidential Information Produced by Non-Parties. A party may designate as “Confidential” documents or discovery materials produced by a non-party by providing written notice to all parties of the relevant document numbers or other identification within thirty (30) days after receiving such documents or discovery materials. Any party or non-party may voluntarily disclose to others without restriction any information designated by that party or non-party as confidential, although a document may lose its confidential status if it is made public. 9. Challenges to Confidential Designation. If

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

Whittingham v. Attorney General's Office, (D. Nev. 2021).

Whittingham v. Attorney General's Office (Whittingham v. Attorney General's Office) — 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)