Opinion
2:23-CV-00176-RSM
12-19-2023
ORDER DENYING STIPULATED MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This matter comes before the Court on the parties' Joint Stipulated Protective Order, Dkt. #55. The Court finds that the proposed Protective Order does not conform to the requirement that its “protection from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles” as stated by Local Rule 26(c)(2). Under the section entitled Confidential Material, the Court's model protective order instructs: “[t]he parties must include a list of specific documents such as ‘company's customer list' or ‘plaintiff's medical records;' do not list broad categories of documents such as ‘sensitive business material.'” The parties have not followed these instructions and instead lists the following: “(c) non-public research, technical, commercial, or financial information that the party has maintained as confidential[.]” Dkt. #55 at 2 (emphasis added). This is too broad for a protective order under the Court's Local Rules.
Although some proper categories of documents are referenced, the Court finds that the parties have impermissibly left the door open to labeling a wide variety of documents as confidential, and the Court does not want to waste time denying motions to seal. The parties submit no argument to justify this departure from the model protective order's guidelines. Accordingly, this Motion will be denied.
Having reviewed the briefing, along with the remainder of the record, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS that the parties' Stipulated Protective Order, Dkt. #55, is DENIED.