DC Comics v. Pacific Pictures Corporation et al

Filing 554

ORDER GRANTING DC COMICS' MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Ralph Zarefsky re MOTION for Protective Order 538 . (Protective Order) (ib)

1

6

DANIEL M. PETROCELLI (S.B. #097802)
[e-mail]
MATTHEW T. KLINE (S.B. #211640)
[e-mail]
CASSANDRA L. SETO (S.B. #246608)
[e-mail]
O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP
1999 Avenue of the Stars, 7th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067-6035
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

7

Attorneys for Plaintiff DC Comics

2
3
4
5

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

DC COMICS,

Case No. CV 10-3633 ODW (RZx)

11

Plaintiff,

12

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

v.
PACIFIC PICTURES
CORPORATION, IP WORLDWIDE,
LLC, IPW, LLC, MARC TOBEROFF,
an individual, MARK WARREN
PEARY, as personal representative of
the ESTATE OF JOSEPH SHUSTER,
JEAN ADELE PEAVY, an individual,
LAURA SIEGEL LARSON, an
individual and as personal
representative of the ESTATE OF
JOANNE SIEGEL, and DOES 1-10,
inclusive,

DISCOVERY MATTER
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
DC COMICS’ MOTION FOR A
PROTECTIVE ORDER

Defendants.

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
DC’S MOT. FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER

1

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that DC Comics’ Motion

2

For A Protective Order is GRANTED as follows:

3

1. “DC” (as defined in the Court’s December 7, 2010, order, DN 133) and

4

defendant Laura Siegel Larson shall not be required to list on their respective

5

privilege logs any “Privileged” (as defined in the Court’s December 7, 2010, order,

6

DN 133) documents created on or after October 8, 2004, when the first complaint

7

was filed in the Siegel cases, Case Nos. CV-04-8400 ODW (RZx), CV-04-8776

8

ODW (RZx).

9

2. DC and defendants shall not be required to list on their respective

10

privilege logs any Privileged documents created on or after May 14, 2010, when

11

DC filed its complaint in this Pacific Pictures case, Case No. CV 10-3633 ODW

12

(RZx).

13

3. This Order is without prejudice or waiver to any party’s right in the future

14

to request or move to compel the identification or logging of Privileged documents,

15

and is without prejudice or waiver to any party’s right in the future to seek a

16

protective order in response to any such request or motion to compel.

17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18

19
20

Dated: January 7, 2013
Honorable Ralph Zarefsky
United States Magistrate Judge

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
DC’S MOT. FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER