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.

Lobaton v. City of San Diego

United States District Court, S.D. California

July 25, 2016

LUIS JESUS LOBATON, an individual; HEDY JULCA, an individual; DIEGO STEVEN LOBATON, an individual; and “B.C.” a minor, by and through his mother and guardian ad litem, Hedy Julca, Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF SAN DIEGO, a municipal corporation; NATHAN PARGA, an individual; KELVIN LUJAN, an individual, SAM EULER, an individual; ALI BAKHSHI, an individual, and DOES 1 through 200, inclusive, Defendants.

          ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER [ECF NO. 23]

          DAVID H. BARTICK United States Magistrate Judge.

         On July 22, 2016, the parties filed a Joint Motion for Protective Order. (ECF No. 23.) Good cause appearing IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Joint Motion is GRANTED.[1] Accordingly, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), the Court enters the following Protective Order:

         1. Definitions of terms used in this Stipulated Protective Order (“Protective Order”) are:

(a) “Proceeding” means the matter captioned Luis Lobaton, et al. v. City of San Diego, et al., Case No. 15cv1416-GPC (DHB) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California.
(b) “Confidential” refers to: 1) the address, telephone number, and drivers’ license number of any law enforcement officer; 2) the name, address, telephone number, drivers’ license number, photograph, or likeness of any victim other than Plaintiffs herein; 3) the private financial information, including social security number, of any party or witness; 4) the private medical information, including psychiatric or psychological information, of any party or witness, except such medical information as may be relevant to any propensities for violence or history of violence of any police officer involved in the arrest of any Plaintiff; 5) all training materials, including written materials, photographs, documents, and videos utilized by the City of San Diego and the San Diego Police Department and/or its agents, employees, and authorized representatives; 6) all patrol car location data, including but not limited to, GPS data, AVL data, and/or documents in the possession of the City of San Diego and/or the San Diego Police Department that track and/or identify the locations of each individual San Diego Police Department patrol car; and 7) all documents which identify the individual members of the San Diego Police Department assigned to each patrol car.
(i) Such identifying Confidential Information may be redacted ad initio by the producing party upon production of documents containing such information to the requesting party.
(ii) The parties further agree that any internal-affairs investigatory documents related to this case, any personnel records of the involved police officers, and medical records of the involved police officers relating to a history or propensity of violence are by nature Confidential Information.
(c) “Document” refers to any book, pamphlet, periodical, letter, report, memorandum, notation, message, telegram, cable, record, study, working paper, file, chart, graph, photograph, film, index, tape, correspondence, record of purchase or sale, contract, agreement, lease, invoice, e-mail, electronic or other transcriptions or taping of telephone or personal conversations or conferences, or any and all other written, printed, typed, punched, taped, filmed, or graphic matter, or tangible thing, however produced or reproduced.

         2. After carefully evaluating each individual document and determining in good faith that specific information contained therein is confidential as defined in Paragraph 1 above, those portions of the document containing such confidential information may be designated as “Confidential” by stamping or typing the designation on a page by page basis. If there is an inadvertent production of documents that bear pages containing an improper designation, those pages may be redesignated by providing written notice to the receiving party. Upon receiving such written notice, the receiving party shall treat the document pages according to the new designation.

         3. Deposition testimony or other testimony may be designated “Confidential” either before the testimony is given, at the time the testimony is given, or at any time thereafter. The transcript and/or video recording of the designated testimony shall be bound in a separate volume and marked by the court reporter with the appropriate legend as directed by the designating party.

         4. Documents containing information designated “Confidential” shall not be disclosed or used for any purpose other than the defense, prosecution, or settlement of this Proceeding, unless all such confidential information is redacted. The parties do not waive any objections to the admissibility of any such documents produced pursuant to this Stipulation and Order

         5. Unredacted “Confidential” documents may be seen only by:

(a) this Court and its personnel;
(b) attorneys actively participating in the prosecution of the case, persons employed or associated with such attorneys, the parties themselves, expert witnesses retained and/or consulted by the attorneys working on the case; the Court and its employees; and stenographic reporters who are ...

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.