The opinion of the court was delivered by: Margaret A. Nagle United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER ENTERED PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES
Pursuant to Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and based on the parties' Stipulation for Protective Order ("Stipulation"), filed on November 11, 2010, the terms of the protective order to which the parties have agreed are adopted as a protective order of this Court except to the extent, as set forth below, that those terms have been modified by the Court's amendment of Paragraphs 2, 5, 6 and 7 and Exhibit A of the Stipulation.
The parties are expressly cautioned that the designation of any information, document, or thing as "CONFIDENTIAL" or "CONFIDENTIAL -- ATTORNEY'S EYES ONLY" or other designation(s) used by parties does not, in and of itself, create any entitlement to file such information, document, or thing, in whole or in part, under seal. Accordingly, reference to this Order or to the parties' designation of any information, document, or thing as "CONFIDENTIAL" or "CONFIDENTIAL -- ATTORNEY'S EYES ONLY" or other designation(s) used by parties is wholly insufficient to warrant a filing under seal.
There is a strong presumption that the public has a right of access to judicial proceedings and records in civil cases. In connection with non-dispositive motions, good cause must be shown to support a filing under seal. The parties' mere designation of any information, document, or thing as "CONFIDENTIAL" or "CONFIDENTIAL -- ATTORNEY'S EYES ONLY" or other designation(s) used by partiesdoes not - without the submission of competent evidence, in the form of a declaration or declarations, establishing that the material sought to be filed under seal qualifies as confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable - constitute good cause.
Further, if sealing is requested in connection with a dispositive motion or trial, then compelling reasons, as opposed to good cause, for the sealing must be shown, and the relief sought shall be narrowly tailored to serve the specific interest to be protected. See Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass'n, 605 F.3d 665, 677-79 (9th Cir. 2010). For each item or type of information, document, or thing sought to be filed or introduced under seal in connection with a dispositive motion or trial, the party seeking protection must articulate compelling reasons, supported by specific facts and legal justification, for the requested sealing order. Again, competent evidence supporting the application to file documents under seal must be provided by declaration.
Any document that is not confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectible in its entirety will not be filed under seal if the confidential portions can be redacted.
If documents can be redacted, then a redacted version for public viewing, omitting only the confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectible portions of the document, shall be filed. Any application that seeks to file documents under seal in their entirety should include an explanation of why redaction is not feasible.
THE PARTIES ARE DIRECTED TO REVIEW CAREFULLY AND ACT IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL ORDERS ISSUED BY THE HONORABLE JOHN F. WALTER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE, WITH RESPECT TO FILINGS UNDER SEAL.
TERMS OF PROTECTIVE ORDER
1. This Order shall govern the use, handling and disclosure of all documents, testimony or information produced or given in this action which are designated to be subject to this Order in accordance with the terms hereof. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Order, confidential material used at trial will become public absent a separate court order upon written motion and sufficient cause shown.
2. All parties to this case shall treat as confidential, any information designated by a party as "Confidential" or "Confidential -- Attorney's Eyes Only" pursuant to this order, and all transcripts and other materials that reflect or incorporate the confidential information therein. Specifically, the parties shall proceed as follows:
a) Any party or non-party producing or filing the confidential documents in this action may designate such materials and the information contained therein subject to this Order by typing or stamping on the front of the document, or on the portion(s) of the document for which confidential treatment is designated, "Confidential" or "Confidential -- Attorney's Eyes Only." If documents were produced before the entry of this Order, which documents the producing party believes should be treated as "Confidential" or Confidential -- Attorney's Eyes Only," than the producing party may so designate the documents, and all receiving parties will immediately thereupon make said documents as "Confidential" or "Confidential -- Attorney's Eyes Only" and treat them as such.
b) To the extent any motions, briefs, pleadings, deposition transcripts, or other papers to be filed with the Court incorporate documents or information subject to this Order, the party filing shall notify designating party of its intention to file such documents, and shall file them with the clerk under seal. A party filing any such designated material under seal must comply with Local Rule 79-5.
c) Documents and information including, but not limited to, all testimony, deposition, or otherwise, that refers, reflects or otherwise discusses any information designated "Confidential" or "Confidential -- Attorney's Eyes Only" hereunder, shall not be used, directly or indirectly, by any person (including other defendants) for any business, commercial or competitive purposes or for any purpose whatsoever other ...