United States District Court, C.D. California
A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS
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. Accordingly, Plaintiff Phoenix Books, Inc.
(“Plaintiff”) hereby petitions the Court to enter
the following Protective Order. Plaintiff acknowledges 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.
GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT
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 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 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
Plaintiff's intent 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.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PROCEDURE FOR FILING UNDER SEAL
further acknowledges, as set forth in Section 12.3, below,
that this Protective Order does not entitle the parties 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.
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 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
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.
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
Action: this pending federal lawsuit, entitled Phoenix Books,
Inc. v. Mr Bongo Worldwide Ltd; No. CV 19-6000-JFW (RAOx).
Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the
designation of information or items under this Order.
“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.
Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well
as their support staff).
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 responses to
discovery in this matter.
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.
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.
Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation,
association or other legal entity not named as a Party to
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, and includes
Party: any party to this Action, including all of its
officers, directors, employees, consultants, retained
experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support
Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces
Disclosure or Discovery Material in this Action.
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.
Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that
is designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” 2.15 Receiving
Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material
from a Producing Party.
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
of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by the
orders of the trial judge. This Order does not govern ...