Richardson v. City of Long Beach

          Della Roshawn Richardson, Plaintiff, Pro Se.

          City of Long Beach, Defendant, represented by Howard Darryl Russell, Long Beach City Attorney's Office.

          Former Chief Police Anthony Batts, Defendant, represented by Howard Darryl Russell, Long Beach City Attorney's Office.

          Officer Uribe J. Lorenzo, Defendant, represented by Howard Darryl Russell, Long Beach City Attorney's Office.

          Andrea D. Allen, Defendant, represented by Howard Darryl Russell, Long Beach City Attorney's Office.

          Officer Paul Munson, Defendant, represented by Howard Darryl Russell, Long Beach City Attorney's Office.

          Officer Robert Cruz, Defendant, represented by Howard Darryl Russell, Long Beach City Attorney's Office.

          Officer Christopher E Martinez, Defendant, represented by Howard Darryl Russell, Long Beach City Attorney's Office.

          Officer Sergio Ruvalcaba, Defendant, represented by Howard Darryl Russell, Long Beach City Attorney's Office.

          Officer Jesus E Valdez, Defendant, represented by Howard Darryl Russell, Long Beach City Attorney's Office.

          Officer C Ignacio, Defendant, represented by Howard Darryl Russell, Long Beach City Attorney's Office.

          STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

          PAUL L. ABRAMS, Magistrate Judge.

         1. A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS

         Discovery in this action is a 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 may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated 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 from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal.

         B. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT

         It appearing that information from the files of the Long Beach Police Department, requested by Plaintiff during discovery in this matter, is information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than the prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials and information consist of, among other things, confidential personal or financial information, information implicating privacy rights of 3rd parties, and information otherwise generally unavailable to the public, which may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common-law. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in preparation for and conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this matter. It is the intent of the parties that information will not be designated as confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of this case.

         2. DEFINITIONS

         2.1 Action: this pending federal law suit.

         2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of information or items under this Order.

         2.3 "CONFIDENTIAL" Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protections under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in the Good Cause Statement.

         2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as their support staff).

         2.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as "CONFIDENTIAL."

         2.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or as a consultant in this Action.

         2.7 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 consultant in this Action.

         2.8 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action. House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel.

         2.9 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity not named as a Party to this action.

         2.10 Outside Counsel of Record: atttorneys who are not employees of a party to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this Action and have appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on behalf of that party, and includes support staff.

         2.11 Party: any party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, consultants, retained experts, and outside ...