Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
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.

Chartis Specialty Insurance Co. v. United States

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

September 25, 2013

CHARTIS SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois corporation, for itself, and as subrogee of Whittaker Corporation; and WHITTAKER CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

WOOD, SMITH, HENNING & BERMAN LLP, DAVID F. WOOD, GREGORY P. ARAKAWA, Attorneys for Plaintiff, CHARTIS SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY.

SCOTT L. DAVIS, (admitted pro hac vice), MATTHEW J. SCHROEDER, (admitted pro hac vice), COLIN G. MARTIN, (admitted pro hac vice), GARDERE WYNNE SEWELL LLP,

PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW, PITTMAN LLP, MARK E. ELLIOT, REYNOLD L. SIEMENS, Attorneys for Plaintiff, WHITTAKER CORPORATION.

ROBERT G. DREHER, Acting Assistant Attorney General, C. SCOTT SPEAR, MICHAEL C. AUGUSTINI, JOHN THOMAS H. DO, Environment & Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Attorneys for Defendant, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED ORDER REGARDING THE INADVERTENT DISCLOSURE OF PRIVILEGED INFORMATION

EDWARD CHEN, District Judge.

The Parties by and through their respective counsel, have jointly stipulated to the terms of this Stipulated Order Governing the Inadvertent Disclosure of Privileged Information, and with the Court being fully advised as to the same, it is hereby ORDERED:

I. APPLICABILITY

1. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) this Court can order that the attorney-client privilege, work product protection, and/or any other applicable privilege or immunity is not waived by the disclosure of a document or other information protected by these privileges either in this litigation or in any other federal or state proceeding.

Except as set forth in paragraph 9 below, this Order shall be applicable to and govern all testimony in deposition transcripts and/or videotapes, documents produced in response to requests for production of documents, answers to interrogatories, responses to requests for admissions, affidavits, declarations, correspondence and all other information or material produced, made available for inspection, or otherwise submitted and transmitted by any of the Parties in this litigation pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (including disclosures pursuant to FRCP 26) or pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act and/or Public Records Act Request to the United States of America or subdivision thereof ("Government"), or by informal exchange and communication between the Parties (collectively "Information"). The treatment of Information disclosed at trial or hearings will be determined at a later date by the Court pursuant to applicable federal and state law.

2. This Order does not excuse a Party from its obligations to undertake reasonable measures to protect against the inadvertent disclosure of privileged Information.

II. PRODUCTION OF MATERIALS CONTAINING POTENTIALLY PRIVILEGED INFORMATION

3. The inadvertent production of any privileged, work product protected or otherwise exempted Information ("Protected Information") shall not be deemed a waiver or impairment of any claim of privilege, work product protection or exemption including, but not limited to, the attorney-client privilege, the protection afforded to work product materials, privileges afforded the Government under applicable statutory or case law or the subject matter thereof as to the inadvertently produced Protected Information as long as the producing Party adheres to the terms of this Order.

4. The producing Party must notify the receiving Party promptly, in writing, within ten (10) business days of discovery that such Protected Information has been produced and provide a new copy of the material with the allegedly privileged portions redacted. In such notice, the producing Party must specifically identify by Bates number, or, if a Bates number does not apply to the particular Information, by other similar identifying information, the documents or other Protected Information produced. The producing Party must further identify the reasonable measures taken to prevent inadvertent disclosure of Protected Information. Any party that complies with this paragraph will be deemed to have taken reasonable steps to rectify disclosures of privileged or protected information or materials.

5. Upon receiving written notice from the producing Party that privileged, work product protected, or exempted Information has been produced, such Information, and all copies thereof, shall be returned to the producing Party within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of such notice unless the receiving Party challenges the exemption designation pursuant to paragraph 6. The receiving Party shall not-use such Protected Information for any purpose, except as provided in paragraph 6, until further Order of the Court. The receiving ...


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.