From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nike, Inc. v. Nikepal International Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 28, 2006
No. CIV S-05-1468 GEB JFM (E.D. Cal. Feb. 28, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-05-1468 GEB JFM.

February 28, 2006


ORDER


Plaintiff's January 31, 2006 motion to compel and defendant's motion for protective order came on regularly for hearing February 23, 2006. Plaintiff was represented by Joshua Koltun. Catherine Ashley Straight appeared for defendant. Upon review of the motion and the documents in support and opposition, upon hearing the arguments counsel and good cause appearing therefor, THE COURT FINDS AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

Both parties have provided proposed protective orders. Only two paragraphs contained differing language, paragraphs 10 and 22. Defendants' January 31, 2006 motion for protective order is granted in part. The court adopts the provisions of plaintiff's proposed protective order, specifically paragraph 10, with the exception of adding, as paragraph 23, a requirement that counsel maintain a log of all persons who have been provided access to this confidential information. Each party's counsel will provide a copy of the log to opposing counsel once expert disclosures have been made by both parties. The court also adopts the proposed language of paragraph 22 of defendants' proposed protective order rather than plaintiff's. A detailed protective order incorporating these changes is issued herewith.

Plaintiff's January 31, 2006 motion to compel is withdrawn.


Summaries of

Nike, Inc. v. Nikepal International Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 28, 2006
No. CIV S-05-1468 GEB JFM (E.D. Cal. Feb. 28, 2006)
Case details for

Nike, Inc. v. Nikepal International Inc.

Case Details

Full title:NIKE, INC., an Oregon corporation, Plaintiff, v. NIKEPAL INTERNATIONAL…

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

Date published: Feb 28, 2006

Citations

No. CIV S-05-1468 GEB JFM (E.D. Cal. Feb. 28, 2006)