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.

Cook v. Standard Insurance Co.

United States District Court, C.D. California

June 16, 2016

JUDITH L. COOK, Plaintiff,
v.
STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY, an Oregon Corporation, and DOES 1 through 30, inclusive, Defendant.

          NEWMEYER & DILLON LLP Robert K. Scott Attorney for Plaintiff JUDITH COOK

          MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES LLP Linda M. Lawson Cindy Mekari Cindy Mekari Attorneys for Defendant STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY

          CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

          Hon. Michael R. Wilner United States Magistrate Judge.

         Pursuant to the stipulation of plaintiff Judith L. Cook (“Plaintiff”) and defendant Standard Insurance Company (“Standard”), by and through their counsel of record, with good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

         1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS

         Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to involve production of 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. Accordingly, the parties hereby jointly move the Court to enter the following Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this 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, as set forth in Section 10, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order creates no entitlement to file confidential information under seal; Central District Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and reflects the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the Court to file material under seal.

         2. DEFINITIONS

         2.1 Party: any party to this action, including all officers, directors, employees, consultants, retained experts, and outside counsel (and their support staff).

         2.2 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium or manner generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, transcripts, or tangible things) that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter.

         2.3 “Confidential” Information or Items: information (regardless of how generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under the applicable procedural rules governing protective orders.

         2.4 “Highly Confidential - Attorneys’ Eyes Only” Information or Items: extremely sensitive “Confidential Information or Items” whose disclosure to another Party or nonparty would create a substantial risk of serious injury that could not be avoided by less restrictive means.

         2.5 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a Producing Party.

         2.6 Producing Party: a Party or non-party that produces Disclosure or Discovery Material in this action.

         2.7 Designating Party: a Party or non-party that designates information or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential - Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” 2.8 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as “Confidential” or as “Highly Confidential - Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” 2.9 Outside Counsel: attorneys who are not employees of a Party but who are retained to represent or advise a Party in this action.

         2.10 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a Party.

         2.11 Counsel (without qualifier): Outside Counsel and House Counsel (as well as their support staffs).

         2.12 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a consultant in this action and who is not a past or a current employee or of a competitor of a Party’s and who, at the time of retention, is not anticipated to become an employee of a Party or a competitor of a Party. This definition includes a professional jury or trial consultant retained in connection with this litigation.

         2.13 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services (e.g., photocopying; videotaping; translating; preparing exhibits or demonstrations; organizing, storing, retrieving data in any form or medium; etc.) and their employees and subcontractors.

         3. SCOPE

         The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material (as defined above), but also any information copied or extracted therefrom, as well as all copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations thereof, plus any deposition testimony, conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material, other than during a court hearing or trial.

         4. DURATION

         Even after the termination of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations imposed by this Order shall remain in effect until a Designating Party agrees otherwise in writing or a court order otherwise directs.

         5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL

         5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection. Each Party or non-party that designates information or items for protection under this Order must take care to limit any such designation to specific material that qualifies under the appropriate standards. A Designating Party must take care to designate for protection only those parts of material, documents, items, or oral or written communications that qualify so that other portions of the material, documents, items, or communications for which protection is not warranted are not swept unjustifiably within the ambit of this Order.

         Mass, indiscriminate, or routine designations are prohibited. Designations that are shown to be clearly unjustified, or that have been made for an improper purpose (e.g., to unnecessarily encumber or retard the case development process, or to impose unnecessary ...


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.