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.

Gaspari Nutrition, Inc. v. Kaltwasser

United States District Court, C.D. California

June 28, 2017

GASPARI NUTRITION, INC. Plaintiff,
v.
ASHLEY KALTWASSER; EHPLABS, LLC; and IZHAR BASHA, Defendants.

          MURPHY, CAMPBELL, ALLISTON & QUINN, Mariel Covarrubias Attorneys for Plaintiff GASPARI NUTRITION.

          WALLERSTEIN LAW, Michael Wallerstein Attorneys for Defendant Ashley Kaltwasser.

          CALL & JENSEN A Professional Corporation Scott R. Hatch, Attorneys for Defendants EHPLABS, LLC and IZHAR BASHA.

          STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER [1]

          GAIL J. STANDISH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         1. A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS

         Discovery in this action is 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 is 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.

         B. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT

         This action is likely to involve trade secrets, customer and pricing lists and other valuable research, development, commercial, financial, technical and/or proprietary information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials and information may consist of, among other things, confidential business or financial information, information regarding confidential business practices, or other confidential research, development, or commercial information (including information implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise generally unavailable to the public, or 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 and necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of the 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 or confidential - attorney's eyes only 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.

         C. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PROCEDURE FOR FILING UNDER SEAL

         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; Local Civil 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.

         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. See Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006), Phillips v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002), Makar-Welbon v. Sony Electrics, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 576, 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999) (even stipulated protective orders require good cause showing), and a specific showing of good cause or compelling reasons with proper evidentiary support and legal justification, must be made with respect to Protected Material that a party seeks to file under seal. The parties' mere designation of Disclosure or Discovery Material as CONFIDENTIAL or CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEY EYES ONLY does not (without the submission of competent evidence by declaration, establishing that the material sought to be filed under seal qualifies as confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable) constitute good cause.

         Further, if a party requests sealing related to a dispositive motion or trial, then compelling reasons, not only 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.

         2. DEFINITIONS

         2.1 Action: this pending federal lawsuit.

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

         2.3.1 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that is so designated by the producing party and that qualifies for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) and as specified above in the Good Cause Statement.

         2.3.2 “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEY EYES ONLY” Information or Items: CONFIDENTIAL information (regardless of how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that is so designated by the producing party and that qualifies for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), as specified above in the Good Cause Statement, and that also meets the definition set forth below. Specifically, the designation CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS EYES ONLY may be used only for the following types of past, current, or future CONFIDENTIAL information: (1) sensitive technical information, including current research, development and manufacturing information and patent prosecution information, (2) sensitive and non-public business information, including sensitive financial or marketing information and the identity of suppliers, distributors, and potential or actual customers, (3) competitive technical information, including technical analyses or comparisons of competitor's products, or (4) competitive business information, including non-public financial or marketing analyses or comparisons of competitor's products and strategic product planning.

         2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel 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” or “CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEY EYES ONLY.” 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 responses to discovery in this matter.

         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 as a 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.

         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: attorneys who are not employees of a party to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this Action including their support staff.

         2.11 Party: any party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel (and their support staffs).

         2.12 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery Material in this Action.

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

         2.14 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as “CONFIDENTIAL or CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEY EYES ONLY.”

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

         3. SCOPE

         The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material.

         Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by the orders of the trial judge. This Order does not govern ...


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.