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.

Belderol v. Global Tel* Link

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

October 22, 2013

BRENDA BELDEROL, an individual, Plaintiff,
v.
GLOBAL TEL*LINK, and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Defendants. GLOBAL TEL*LINK, Counter-Plaintiff/Defendant,
v.
BRENDA BELDEROL, an individual, Counter-Defendant/Plaintiff.

PROTECTIVE ORDER ENTERED PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES' STIPULATION

MARGARET A. NAGLE, Magistrate Judge.

Pursuant to Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and based on the parties' Stipulated Protective Order ("Stipulation") filed on September 23, 2013, the terms of the protective order to which the parties have agreed are adopted as a protective order of this Court (which generally shall govern the pretrial phase of this action) except to the extent, as set forth below, that those terms have been substantively modified by the Court's amendment of paragraphs 2, 3(a)(vii), and 4 of, and Exhibit A to, the Stipulation. The parties are expressly cautioned that the designation of any information, document, or thing as Confidential, Highly Confidential - Attorney's Eyes Only, or other designation(s) used by the 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, Highly Confidential - Attorney's Eyes Only, or other designation(s) used by the 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, Highly Confidential - Attorney's Eyes Only, 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 protectable 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 protectable 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.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Protective Order, in the event that this case proceeds to trial, all information, documents, and things discussed or introduced into evidence at trial will become public and available to all members of the public, including the press, unless sufficient cause is shown in advance of trial to proceed otherwise.

THE PARTIES ARE DIRECTED TO REVIEW CAREFULLY AND ACT IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL ORDERS ISSUED BY THE HONORABLE S. JAMES OTERO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE, INCLUDING THOSE APPLICABLE TO PROTECTIVE ORDERS AND FILINGS UNDER SEAL.

TERMS OF PROTECTIVE ORDER

1. Belderol and GTL may provide to the other party certain confidential documents and information that have been or will be designated as "Confidential" or "Highly Confidential - Attorney's Eyes Only (AEO')." Such documents or information shall consist of trade secrets, proprietary information and other confidential business information, and/or private and confidential employment information, including third party personnel information, whether it be a document, information contained in any document (including written discovery responses), or information revealed during a deposition. A designation of "Highly Confidential - AEO" refers to those items or information that are extremely sensitive and whose disclosure to another party or non-party would create a substantial risk of serious harm that could not be avoided by less restrictive means. This includes, but is not limited to, information Belderol did not know or have access to during her employment with GTL.

2. The above-described documents and information pertaining to confidential information that are produced or revealed in this action shall be deemed Confidential or Highly Confidential - AEO subject to the terms of this Protective Order.

3. Confidential documents and information may be used solely for purposes of this litigation. All such confidential information or any information derived therefrom shall not be disclosed, distributed, or shown by Belderol or GTL, or their respective counsel, to any natural person, corporation, union, partnership, firm, entity, or association whatsoever, except to:

a. Disclosure of "Confidential" Information or Items. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court or permitted in writing by the designating party, a receiving party may disclose any information designated "Confidential" only to:

i. The named plaintiff, Brenda Belderol (if the receiving party is plaintiff's counsel);
ii. Any counsel who have filed appearances on behalf of a party to the above-captioned action;
iii. Employees of such counsel (such as secretaries, clerks, paralegals, or associates) who have direct responsibility for assisting such counsel in the preparation and trial of the above-captioned action;
iv. Officers, directors, or employees of GTL (including in-house counsel) to the extent necessary for their participation in the above-captioned action;
v. Experts of a party who have direct responsibility for assisting counsel in the preparation and trial of ...

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.