Opinion
8:23-cv-2168-SDM-CPT
03-15-2024
TRIS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. UPTECH SALES, LLC, et al. Defendants.
ORDER
HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER P. TUITE United States Magistrate Judge
Before the Court is the parties' Joint Motion for Entry of Stipulated Protective Order. (Doc. 47). For the reasons set forth below, the parties' motion is denied without prejudice.
The issuance of protective orders is governed generally by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). That rule provides that, upon a showing of good cause, a court may issue a protective order “requiring that a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information not be revealed or be revealed only in a specified way.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c)(1)(G); see also Chicago Tribune Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1313 (11th Cir. 2001) (per curiam).
Upon careful review of the parties' stipulated protective order, the Court notes it suffers from a deficiency that undermines the parties' good cause showing. Namely, the proposed order states in paragraph 19 that “[t]his Order shall survive the final determination of this action and shall remain in full force and effect after conclusion of all proceedings in this action to provide th[e] Court with ancillary jurisdiction to enforce its terms.” (Doc. 47-1 at 11). This language runs counter to the general practice of courts in this District of declining to maintain jurisdiction of a lawsuit beyond the case's conclusion. See, e.g., Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 2014 WL 1292692, at *3 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 31, 2014) (refusing to adopt a provision mandating that the court retain jurisdiction after the action's final determination so that the court could resolve disclosure disputes); Kristoff-Rampata v. Publix Super Markets, Inc., 2016 WL 11431488, at *4 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 9, 2016) (same); Kerswill v. Modern Brokers of Am. LLC, 2023 WL 3847325, at *1 (M.D. Fla. June 6, 2023) (same). The Court sees no reason to deviate from this practice here.
In light of the above, the parties' Joint Motion for Entry of Stipulated Protective Order (Doc. 47) is denied without prejudice.
SO ORDERED.