Opinion
23-cv-02556-BLF (SVK)
02-06-2024
CINTIA BAUTISTA, Plaintiff, v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, Defendant.
ORDER FOR REVISIONS TO PROPOSED STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Re: Dkt. No. 27
SUSAN VAN KEULEN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Before the Court is the Parties' draft stipulated protective order. Dkt. 27 (the “Proposed PO”). The Court has reviewed the Proposed PO, along with a redline showing the changes made by the Parties to this District's model protective order (“Model PO”), and concludes that several changes are necessary to the Proposed PO to properly reflect the legal standards and procedures for designating confidential material in this litigation. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the Parties to submit a revised proposed protective order by February 13, 2024, as follows:
Page and line citations refer to the redline of the Proposed PO provided to the Court.
• The Parties shall delete the introductory “Good Cause Statement” at pages 1-3 of the Proposed PO and all references to that statement elsewhere in the document. The Court declines to prejudge whether particular information or documents are properly designated as protected material. This determination, which is highly fact-specific, will be based on the showing made at the appropriate time, such as if a challenge to a confidentiality designation is made under Section 6 or a party seeks to file material under seal pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5.
• The Parties shall restore the language at page 5, lines 19-28, except that they may replace the last sentence (page 5, lines 27-28) with their language at page 6, lines 1-2.
• The Court notes that the Parties have made substantial changes to section 6 regarding challenges to confidentiality designations. Regardless of these changes, the Court emphasizes that all disputes under the protective order must conform to the procedures set forth in Judge van Keulen's Civil and Discovery Referral Matters Standing Order, including but not limited to the meet and confer requirements and the requirement that disputes be presented in the form of a joint statement. Upon submission of a revised proposed protective order, the Court will make its standard revisions to confirm that these procedures apply.
• The Parties shall restore the language in section 12.3 regarding the showing that must be made before the Court will permit material to be filed under seal, specifically page 15, lines18-20.
• After the Parties have revised the PO, they must file both a redline against the Model PO.
• Dkt. 27 is TERMINATED.
SO ORDERED.