Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

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.

Wawgd, Inc. v. Sentinel Ins. Co., Ltd.

United States District Court, S.D. California

July 17, 2017

WAWGD, INC. DBA FORESIGHT SPORTS, a California Corporation, Plaintiff,
SENTINEL INS. COMPANY, LTD., a Connecticut corporation, and DOES 1-100, inclusive, Defendants.


          Hon. Bernard G. Skomal United States Magistrate Judge.

         On July 14, 2017, the parties submitted a Third Joint Motion for Stipulated Protective Order Re: Confidential Documents. (ECF No. 19.) The Court previously denied two prior joint motions for stipulated protective orders due to failure to comply with the Court's Chambers' Rules. (ECF Nos. 16, 18.)

         Having reviewed and considered the instant motion, and good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS the Third Joint Motion for Stipulated Protective Order Re: Confidential Documents (ECF No. 19) as follows:


         Pursuant to the Parties' Stipulation, 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 may be warranted. As the parties acknowledge, the Court notes 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 Court further notes, as set forth in Section 13.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle the Parties to file confidential information under seal; instead, the Civil Local Rules 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.


         Pursuant to the Parties' Stipulation and counsel's representations to the Court therein, this action is likely to involve the discovery of confidential, proprietary, and trade secret policies, procedures, manuals, guidelines, and/or standards regarding the handling of insurance claims 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 consist of, among other things, confidential business information, information regarding confidential business practices, or other confidential commercial information, 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 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 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.

         3. DEFINITIONS

         3.1 Action: WAWGD, Inc. v. Sentinel Ins. Co. Ltd., S.D. Cal., Case No. 3:16-cv-02917-CAB-BGS.

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

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

         3.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record (as well as their support staff).

         3.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 3.6 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.

         3.7 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.

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

         3.9 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys 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 that has appeared on behalf of that party, including support staff.

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

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

         3.12 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.

         3.13 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 3.14 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a Producing Party.

         4. SCOPE

         The protections conferred by this 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 the use of Protected Material at trial.

         5. DURATION

         Once a case proceeds to trial, all of the court-filed information to be introduced that was previously designated as confidential or maintained pursuant to this protective order becomes public and will be presumptively available to all members of the public, including the press, unless compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings to proceed otherwise are made to the trial judge in advance of the trial. See Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180-81 (9th Cir. 2006) (distinguishing “good cause” showing for sealing documents produced in discovery from “compelling reasons” standard when merits-related documents are part of court record). Accordingly, the terms of this protective order do not extend beyond the commencement of the trial.

         6. DESIGNATING ...

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.