Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Vargas v. Ford Motor Co.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

June 14, 2013

OMAR VARGAS, individually, and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff,

CAPSTONE LAW APC Jordan L. Lurie, (SBN 130013) David L. Cheng, (SBN 240926) Tarek H. Zohdy, (SBN 247775) Cody R. Padgett, (SBN 275553) Los Angeles, California, Attorneys for Plaintiff.

DYKEMA GOSSETT LLP John M. Thomas, (266842) Tamara A. Bush, (197153) Krista L. Lenart, (admitted pro hac vice) David M. George, (admitted pro hac vice) Los Angeles, CA, Attorneys for Defendant.

DYKEMA GOSSETT LLP John M. Thomas, Tamara A. Bush, Attorneys for Defendant Ford Motor Co.

CAPSTONE LAW APC David L. Cheng, Jordan L. Lurie, Tarek H. Zohdv, Cody R. Padgett, Attorneys for Plaintiff.


FREDERICK F. MUMM, Magistrate Judge.

Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of material that the producing party contends is confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation would be warranted, including but not limited to (1) engineering documents, including design drawings and specifications, (2) test documents and testing procedures; (3) manufacturing specifications and procedures; (4) internal business or financial information; (5) confidential customer information; and (6) any other similar proprietary, confidential, or private information, including but not limited to trade secrets. A protective order is necessary for information in categories (1), (2), (3) and (4) because the producing party operates in a highly competitive, global marketplace and is dependent upon its technical and business know-how to achieve and maintain a competitive advantage. Disclosure of this information could result in serious and immediate competitive and economic harm. Information in categories (5) and (6) may include such things as personally identifying information, trade secrets not falling within one of the other categories, and competitive intelligence, and must be protected for personal privacy or competitive protection reasons. Because information produced in this case may be shared with consulting and testifying experts, a private agreement between the parties would not suffice, and a court order is required.

Therefore, to expedite the flow of discovery material, facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality, adequately protect material entitled to be kept confidential, and ensure that protection is afforded only to material so entitled, the parties stipulate and agree to the following form of protective order:

1. Scope of Order. This Order is intended to facilitate the Parties' production of information and documents as part of voluntary disclosure and in response to discovery requests. Nothing in this Order is to be construed to expand or limit the Parties' discovery obligations. This Order covers the production and use of all Protected Documents in this action that constitute, contain or disclose, in whole or in part, information which the Designating Party designates as "Confidential." This Order is also intended to apply to any documents produced to the Parties by a non-party in connection with a subpoena.

2. General Definitions. For purposes of this Order, the following terms have the following meanings:

a. Pursuant to FRCP 26(c)(1)(G) and Cal. Civil Code ยงยง 3426, et seq ., "Confidential Information" shall mean trade secrets or other confidential research, development, or commercially sensitive business information, the disclosure of which would cause competitive harm, that is contained in Protected Documents, and which have not been or made available to the public.

b. "Customer" shall mean any person or entity that purchases or otherwise comes to possess Defendant's product.

c. "Designating Party" shall mean the Party or non-party designating Discovery Material as "Confidential."

d. "Discovery Materials" shall mean and include, without limitation, Documents, including Electronically Stored Information (ESI), responses to interrogatories, requests for admissions, or other discovery requests, physical objects, samples, CD-ROMs, tapes or other items, deposition transcripts and exhibits thereto, and information provided by or on behalf of the Parties or any non-party witness pursuant to subpoena or otherwise in the course of discovery.

e. "Document" shall mean and include, without limitation, all written material, videotapes and all other tangible items, produced in whatever format (e.g., hard copy, electronic, digital, etc.) and on whatever media (e.g., hard copy, videotape, computer diskette, CD-ROM, DVD, hard drive or otherwise) defined as broadly as permitted under FRCP 34.

f. "Party" or "Parties" shall mean and include the parties to this litigation.

g. "Pleadings" shall mean and include, without limitation, all papers, motions, briefs, affidavits, declarations, ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.