The opinion of the court was delivered by: Margaret A. Nagle United States Magistrate Judge
PROTECTIVE ORDER ENTERED PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES' STIPULATION
Pretrial Conference: July 19, 2011 Trial Date: September 7, 2011 Pursuant to Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and based on the parties' Stipulation To Entry Of Protective Order and [Proposed] Protective Order ("Proposed Protective Order") filed on February 24, 2011, the terms of the protective order to which the parties have agreed are adopted as a protective order of this Court, which is to govern the pretrial phase of this action, except to the extent, as set forth below, that those terms have been modified by the Court's amendment of Paragraph 12 and Exhibit A of the Proposed Protective Order.
The parties are expressly cautioned that the designation of any information, document, or thing as "Confidential," 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 Protective Order or to the parties' designation of any information, document, or thing as "Confidential," 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 other designation(s) used by parties,does 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.
TERMS OF PROTECTIVE ORDER
1. Overview: Any person or party subject to this Protective Order who receives from any other person or party any information of any kind provided in the course of discovery in the action (hereinafter "Discovery Material") that is designated as "Confidential" pursuant to the terms of this Protective Order (hereinafter, the "Confidential Information" or "Confidential Discovery Material") shall not disclose such Confidential Information to anyone else except as expressly permitted hereunder.
2. Material Designated As "Confidential": The person or party disclosing or producing any given Discovery Material may designate as "Confidential" such portion of such material as the person or party in good faith believes includes information that is not available to the public and is confidential, proprietary, commercially sensitive, or constitutes a trade secret. The designation shall be made by stamping or otherwise clearly marking each page of the Discovery Material sought to be protected with the legend "Confidential." The parties, or some of them, request protection of such information on the grounds that if disclosed it could be harmful to the parties, or any of them, and that said information, if disclosed, could be helpful to the competitors of the parties, or any of them, and that said information therefore requires special protection from disclosure pursuant to F.R.C.P. 26(c).
3. Disclosure Of "Confidential" Materials: No person or party subject to this Protective Order, other than the producing person or party, shall disclose any of the Discovery Material designated by the producing person or party as "Confidential" to any other person whomsoever, except to:
(a) the parties to this action, except, with respect to the corporate parties, Discovery Material designated Confidential may only be disclosed to the corporate parties' Officers, Directors, Senior Vice-Presidents, and Controller;
(b) in-house (or corporate) legal counsel, and outside attorneys retained specifically for this action, and fellow employees of each such attorneys' law firms to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose such Confidential Discovery Material;
(c) its author, its addressee, and any other person indicated on the face of the document as having received a copy;
(d) any employee, or former employee, of any sender or recipient of the document (e.g. where a Purchase Order from Company A to Company B is produced in litigation by Company A, said document may be disclosed to ...