Mitchell v. Felker

Full title: ROBERT MITCHELL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. T. FELKER, et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Jun 6, 2013

2:08-cv-1196 TLN EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 6, 2013)

Opinion

ROBERT MITCHELL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. T. FELKER, et al., Defendants. No. 2:08-cv-1196 TLN EFB P United States District Court, E.D. California. June 6, 2013

          ORDER

          EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiffs are state prisoners proceeding with counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 17, 2012, the undersigned approved the parties' Stipulated Protective Order, which permits the parties to in good faith, designate as confidential any discovery responses "that might compromise the safety or security of a prison or prisoner." Dckt. No. 123 ("Protective Order") § A. Plaintiffs now move to remove defendants' confidentiality designations from certain pages of the Kelly Harrington deposition transcript, or alternatively, to modify the terms of the Protective Order. Dckt. No. 185¹; see also Protective Order § B(10)(b) (reserving the right of any party to apply to the court for an order removing the confidential material designation from any documents).

1 Plaintiffs also filed a motion to seal the documents submitted in support of the above-referenced motion. Dckt. No. 184.

         On June 5, 2013, the court heard plaintiffs' motion. Attorney Julianne Mossler appeared at the hearing on behalf of defendants; attorney Rebekah Evenson appeared on behalf of plaintiffs. As stated on the record and for the reasons stated on the record, it is hereby

         ORDERED that:

         1. Plaintiffs' request to remove the confidentiality designation from pages 362-367, and 369 of Mr. Kelly Harrington's March 12, 2013, deposition transcript, as well as accompanying exhibits 238 and 241 (Dckt. No. 185) is: (a) granted as to pages 362-367, and 369 and Exhibit 238; and (b) denied as to Exhibit 241. Thus, pages 362-367, and 369 and Exhibit 238 are not confidential and not covered by the Protective Order; Exhibit 241 is confidential and is covered by the Protective Order. Plaintiffs' request to submit Exhibit 241 to the state court under seal (Dckt. No. 185) is also denied.

         2. In accordance with the above, plaintiffs' request to seal (Dckt. No. 184) is: (a) denied as to the unredacted request to remove the confidentiality designations and Exhibits A and B thereto; and (b) granted as to Exhibit C thereto. The Clerk of Court is directed to file under seal Exhibit C.