Craine v. General Motors LLC
Filing
16
AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 7/20/2016. (jak)
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
DONNA J. CRAINE
PLAINTIFF
VS.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-cv-00069
GENERAL MOTORS, LLC
DEFENDANT
AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that General Motors LLC shall designate, in good faith, those documents
which it deems to contain trade secrets and confidential research, development and commercial
information (hereinafter referred to as "confidential materials") and that any such documents
produced by General Motors LLC in this case shall be marked as being produced subject to a
Protective Order. Plaintiff shall have the right to contest any such designation made by General
Motors LLC.
In addition, the following shall apply to such confidential materials produced in this case:
A.
These confidential materials shall not be reproduced except as necessary to prosecute this
cause by Plaintiff.
B.
These confidential materials shall not be available for inspection by anyone, except:
1.
Plaintiff in this case and her counsel;
2.
General Motors LLC, its employees and its counsel in this case;
3.
Experts, consultants and other persons who are assisting counsel for the Plaintiff in
the preparation of this matter for trial. Before Plaintiff's counsel allows any such
person to view confidential materials, Plaintiff's counsel must first obtain the
signature of such person on a copy of this Order. At the conclusion of this case,
Plaintiff's counsel must provide General Motors LLC with a list of all persons who
signed a copy of this Order, as well as copies of the signed orders; and
Exhibit 11 A"
4.
Any judge and/or jury having jurisdiction in this matter.
C.
The substance of any information obtained from these confidential materials shall not be
disseminated to anyone not authorized to examine these confidential materials.
D.
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 5.2, any confidential document covered by this Protective Order
shall be redacted to remove confidential information, if possible, rather than filing the
document under seal. Before filing a redacted version of any confidential document covered
by this Protective Order, counsel will provide the proposed redacted version of the document
to opposing counsel for review and allow 3 full business days to respond as to whether it is
acceptable to file the redacted version in lieu of a full version under seal.
E.
To the extent that there is a dispute about the whether a document is confidential, counsel
shall confer in good faith in person before bringing any discovery dispute to the Court. Any
dispute must be handled according to the procedure in the Court's Final Scheduling Order.
F.
Any notes, lists, memoranda, index or compilation prepared or based on any examination of
these confidential materials shall be subject to this Protective Order and shall not be
disseminated to anyone not authorized to examine these confidential materials.
G.
This Order shall terminate one year after the end of this litigation.
H.
The parties recognize that the competitive value of the information contained in the
confidential materials produced by General Motors LLC will continue to be important to
General Motors LLC after the expiration of this protective order. Therefore, at the
conclusion of this case, all confidential materials shall be returned to General Motors LLC,
with the exception of any notes, lists, memoranda, indexes or compilations prepared by
counsel which constitute work-product.
SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED on this the
ioft_ dayof~u+M~,,,,_/_~_ _, 2016.
UNITED STATES DIST
2
CT JUDGE
APPROVED BY:
Isl James W. Harris
James W. Harris
Law Office of James W. Harris
P. 0. Box 185
Blytheville, AR 72316-0185
jwharris1@prodigy.net
Attorney.for Plaintiff
Isl Paul V. Cassisa Jr.
Paul V. Cassisa, Jr.
BUTLER SNOW LLP
P.O. Box 1138
Oxford, MS 38655
paul.cassisa@butlersnow.com
Attorney.for
General Motors LLC
31974139vl
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?