Blackmon v. Gordmans Inc
PROTECTIVE ORDER regarding confidential information 19 . Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 9/7/12. (vjt)
U.S, ,DISTRICT COURT
EASlER.-. DISTRICT ARKANSAS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
SEP 0 7 2012
~~ES W. McCORM~-rCLE~K
CASE NO. 4:11-cv-00712-SWW
1. DEFINITIONS. Limitations under this Protective Order on the use or disclosure
of documents, deposition testimony or other discovery designated as "Confidential" shall
apply to (a) all information, copies, extracts and complete or partial summaries prepared or
derived from such documents or testimony; (b) portions of deposition transcripts, answers
to interrogatories, responses to requests for admissions, responses to requests for
production, initial disclosures and exhibits thereto which directly refer or directly relate to
any such information, documents, copies, extracts or summaries; and (c) portions of briefs,
memoranda or any other writing filed with the Court and exhibits thereto which directly
relate to any such information, documents, copies, extracts or summaries.
Defendants seek to
protect from disclosure certain personal and sensitive information regarding the
employees of Defendants relating to this lawsuit. Before produced documents are copied
or inspected, the producing party may stamp as "Confidential" or similar notation on any
document or deposition testimony which contains such sensitive information. Documents
may also be designated as "Confidential" by written notice to opposing counsel which
identifies the documents so designated by Bates number.
"Confidential," deposition testimony so designated, and information derived therefrom will
be retained by counsel and will not be used for any purpose other than this litigation and
will not be disclosed except pursuant to court order entered after notice, to anyone except:
Counsel who have signed this Order approving it as to form and content,
attorneys who are employed by Plaintiff, retained outside counsel, in house
counsel, law clerks, secretaries or paralegals directly involved in the conduct
of this litigation;
Experts and consultants retained by a party to this action for purposes of
assisting in the preparation or presentation of claims or defenses;
Any deposition or trial witness, during the course of deposition or trial
testimony, when necessary to the testimony of such witness;
Any person who was involved in the preparation of the document;
The Court, Court personnel, court reporters and similar personnel;
representatives except those identified at Paragraph 2(a) above.
Any other person with the prior written consent of the party producing the
document, pleading or deposition testimony.
Prior to receiving or being shown such documents or deposition testimony, persons
falling in the categories listed above in subparagraphs (b), (c), (d), (f) and (g) shall be
shown a copy of, and shall agree in writing, or on the record during trial or deposition, to
be bound by the terms of this Protective Order. During a deposition, any party asserting
confidentiality of any of its documents shall ask the deponent on the record to accept the
terms of this Order. If the deponent refuses to assent, disclosure of the documents during
deposition shall not constitute a waiver of confidentiality. Under such circumstances, the
witness shall sign the original deposition transcript in the presence of the court reporter
and no copy of the transcript or exhibits shall be given to the deponent.
DOCUMENTS ALREADY PRODUCED. Within ten days of the entry of this
Order, parties may inform the party to whom documents have been produced that it
considers certain documents already produced as being subject to this Order as
THIRD PARTY WITNESSES.
A copy of this Protective Order shall be
served with a subpoena or Notice of Deposition on each third party deponent. A third
party witness may designate a document as "Confidential" pursuant to this Order by
stamping it with such notice prior to production or so identifying it on the record during the
deposition of that third party. Either party may also designate documents produced by a
third party as being "Confidential" pursuant to the terms of this Order within ten (1 0) days
of being made aware of the content of such documents. Any document produced by a
third party shall be treated as "Confidential" pursuant to the terms of this Order for such ten
(1 0) day period and thereafter if designated as "Confidential" by either party or by the third
party which produces it. The "Confidential" restrictions of this Order shall no longer apply
to any document produced by a third party which has not been designated as
"Confidential" by the third party or by a party within such ten (10) day period.
Any party may challenge the
"Confidential" designation of any document, by moving the Court for an Order allowing
disclosure. The party challenging the "Confidential" designation of any document shall
give all other parties at least ten (1 0) days notice before filing a motion with the Court and
the parties shall attempt to resolve any disagreement before submitting it to the Court. If a
party challenge the "Confidential" designation of the document(s), the documents at issue
shall continue to be treated as "Confidential" pursuant to the terms of this Order until such
time as the Court has made a ruling with respect to the motion.
RETURN OF DOCUMENTS.
Upon completion of the litigation all
documents and copies of the same designated "Confidential" shall be destroyed or
returned to counsel for the producing party with signed statement reflecting the disposition.
This Order shall not terminate upon the conclusion of this action but shall continue until the
further order of the Court or until the party claiming confidentiality has waived the same in
USE OF DOCUMENTS. Documents produced by any party, including, but
not limited to, "Confidential" documents and information from any documents acquired in
discovery in this litigation shall not be used for any purpose except in connection with the
litigation pending in the United States District Court for Eastern District of Arkansas, Case
No. 4:11-cv-00712-SWW styled Rodney Blackmon v. Gordmans, Inc..
Nothing in this
Order shall limit any party or person in its use of its own documents or from disclosing its
own documents and information. This Order or production of any documents shall not
affect the admissibility of any such document or be deemed a waiver of any objection to
the admissibility of such documents.
EXCEPTIONS. The restrictions embodied in this Order shall be binding on
the party to whom "Confidential" information is disclosed unless and until there is a
Such information was or has become public knowledge absent a
breach of this Protective Order; or
The party to whom such disclosure was made had already learned
such information from a third party who himself has not breached any
confidential relationship which may have existed or exists between
such third party and the party making the disclosure.
NON-EXCLUSIVITY. This Order does not affect the right of a party to seek
to compel disclosure or production of a document or to seek an order modifying or limiting
this Order in any aspect.
The obligations and prohibitions under this Order are not
All other ethical, legal and equitable obligations are unaffected by this
WAIVER. Any waiver under this Order must be made in writing or, if at a
deposition or in Court, on the record.
Any party or person subject to the obligations and
prohibitions of this Order who is determined by the Court to have violated its terms is
subject to sanctions imposed by the Court pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil
SO ORDERED this
day of September, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
PREPARED AND SUBMITIED BY:
By: s/Robert A. Newcomb
Robert A. Newcomb, #73087
P.O. Box 149
Little Rock, AR 72203
Attorney for Plaintiff
s/Scott P. Moore
Scott Parrish Moore, pro hac vice
Baird Holm LLP
1700 Farnam Street
1500 Woodmen Tower
Omaha, NE 68102
(402) 231-8552- Fax
Attorneys for Defendant
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?