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.

United Fabrics International, Inc. v. Boston Proper, Inc.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

October 22, 2013

UNITED FABRICS INTERNATIONAL, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff,
BOSTON PROPER, INC., a Florida corporation; BODELL, INC., a California corporation, and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendants. AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIM

Stephen M. Doniger, (SBN 179314), Scott A. Burroughs, (SBN 235718), Annie Aboulian, (SBN 280693), Trevor W. Barrett (SBN 287174), DONIGER/BURROUGHS Culver City, California, Attorneys for Plaintiff.

Karen Vogel Weil, (Bar No. 145, 066), Mark D. Kachner, (Bar No. 234, 192) KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Attorneys for Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs BOSTON PROPER, INC. and BODELL, INC.


OTIS D. WRIGHT, II, District Judge.


Plaintiff United Fabrics International, Inc. and Defendants Boston Proper, Inc. and Bodell, Inc. (collectively, the "Parties"; individually, a "Party") agree that disclosure and discovery activities in this action are likely to involve production of highly sensitive financial or business information or proprietary information that has not been disseminated to the public at large, that is not readily discoverable by competitors and that has been the subject of reasonable efforts by the respective Parties to maintain its secrecy, and for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation would be warranted. Such information likely will include, among other things, sensitive product information, product design and development materials, marketing and sales information, purchase orders, invoices, distributor information, and customer information relating to design and sales of fabric and fashion apparel.

Each Party wishes to ensure that such confidential information shall not be used for any purpose other than this action and shall not be made public by another Party beyond the extent necessary for purposes of this action. The Parties therefore seek to facilitate the production and protection of such information. The Parties acknowledge that this Protective Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled under the applicable legal principles to treatment as confidential. The Parties further acknowledge that this Protective Order creates no entitlement to file confidential information under seal.

Good cause exists to enter the instant Protective Order to protect such confidential information from public disclosure. The confidential information includes information that could be used by actual or potential competitors to gain a competitive advantage in the marketplace.

Accordingly, based upon the agreement of the Parties and for good cause shown,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that whenever, in the course of these proceedings, any Party or non-party has occasion to disclose information deemed in good faith to constitute confidential information, the Parties and any such non-party shall employ the following procedures:

1. All documents, testimony, and other materials produced by the parties in this case and labeled "Confidential" or "Attorneys' Eyes Only" shall be used only in this proceeding. Nothing in this order shall preclude Plaintiff from using information as to the identity of other individuals or companies involved in the manufacture and sale of the accused product to seek to amend the pleadings and/or assert its copyrights against said companies in a separate action. Defendants preserve all objections to any attempts by Plaintiff to amend the pleadings or file a separate action.

2. Use of any information or documents labeled "Confidential" or "Attorneys' Eyes Only" and subject to this Protective Order, including all information derived therefrom, shall be restricted solely to the litigation of this case and shall not be used by any party for any business, commercial, or competitive purpose. This Protective Order, however, does not restrict the disclosure or use of any information or documents otherwise publicly available or lawfully obtained by the receiving party through means or sources outside of this litigation. Should a dispute arise as to any specific information or document, the burden shall be on the party claiming that such information or document was lawfully obtained through means and sources outside of this litigation.

3. The parties, and third parties subpoenaed by one of the parties, may designate as "Confidential" or "Attorneys' Eyes Only" documents, testimony, written responses, or other materials produced in this case if they contain information that the producing party has a good faith basis for asserting is confidential under the applicable legal standards. The party shall designate each page of the document with a stamp identifying it as "Confidential" or "Attorneys' Eyes Only, " if practical to do so.

4. If portions of documents or other materials deemed "Confidential" or "Attorneys' Eyes Only" or any papers containing or making reference to such materials are filed with the Court, they shall be filed under ...

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.