Xavier Lopez v. City of Riverside

District Court, C.D. California·Decided October 25, 2023·No. 5:21-cv-02140·Unknown

Opinion

LAW OFFICES OF DALE K. GALIPO Dale K. Galipo, Esq. (SBN 144074) dalekgalipo@yahoo.com Marcel F. Sincich, Esq. (SBN 319508) msincich@galipolaw.com 21800 Burbank Boulevard, Suite 310 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Phone: (818) 347-3333 | Fax: (818) 347-4118

Trenton C. Packer (SBN 241057) tpacker@grechpackerlaw.com 7095 Indiana Ave Ste 200 Riverside, CA 92506 Phone: (951) 682-9311 Attorneys for Plaintiff XAVIER LOPEZ PHAEDRA A. NORTON (SBN 200271) City Attorney REBECCA MCKEE-REIMBOLD (SBN 279485) Assistant City Attorney DEBRA K. COOK (SBN 250114) Senior Deputy City Attorney OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 3750 University Avenue, Suite 250 Riverside, CA 92501 Telephone (951) 826-5567 Facsimile (951) 826-5540 Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF RIVERSIDE and EVAN WRIGHT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

XAVIER LOPEZ, CASE No.: 5:21-cv-02140-PSG (JCx)

Plaintiff, [Honorable Philip S. Gutierrez] vs. Magistrate Judge John E. McDermott

CITY OF RIVERSIDE; EVAN STIPULATED PROTECTIVE WRIGHT; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, ORDER

Defendants. [CHANGES MADE BY COURT TO PARAGRAPHS 3, 8 & 9c] 1. A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal. This action involves the officer-involved shooting of Plaintiff Xavier Lopez on January 26, 2021 for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials and information consist of, among other things, confidential medical records, personnel records, and use of force investigation and review records (including information implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise generally unavailable to the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the parties are permitted trial, to address their handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this matter. It is the intent of the parties that information will not be designated as confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of this case. 2. DEFINITIONS 2.1 Action: This pending federal law suit. 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of information or items under this Order. 2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in the Good Cause Statement. 2.4 Counsel: Counsel of Record (as well as their support staff). 2.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 2.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter. 2.7 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action. 2.8 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity not named as a Party to this action. 2.9 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a party to this action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this action and have appeared in this action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on behalf of that party, and includes support staff. 2.10 Party: any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staffs). 2.11 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery Material in this action. 24.12 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors. 2.13 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 2.14 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a Producing Party. 3. SCOPE The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any deposition testimony, conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material other than during a court hearing or at trial. Any use of Protected Material during a court hearing or at trial shall be governed by the orders of the presiding judge. This Order does not govern the use of Protected Material during a court hearing or at trial. 4. DURATION Once a case proceeds to trial, all the information that was designated as confidential or maintained under this Order becomes public and will be presumptively available to all members of the public, including the press, unless the trial judge finds compelling reasons to proceed otherwise. See Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180-81 (9th Cir. 2006) (distinguishing “good cause” showing for sealing documents produced in discovery from “compelling reasons” needed for merits-related documents). Accordingly, the terms of this Order do not extend beyond the beginning of trial. 5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL 5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection. Each Party or Non-Party that designates information or items for protection under this Order must take care to limit any such designation to specific material that qualifies under the appropriate standards. The Designating Party must designate for protection only those parts of material, documents, items, or oral or written communications that qualify so that other portions of the material, documents, items, or communications for which protection is not warrante

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

Xavier Lopez v. City of Riverside, (C.D. Cal. 2023).

Xavier Lopez v. City of Riverside (Xavier Lopez v. City of Riverside) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.