Ignacio Ixta, Jr. et al v. County of Ventura et al

Filing 46

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Alexander F. MacKinnon re Stipulation for Protective Order, #45 . See Order for details. (es)

1 Eugene P. Ramirez (State Bar No. 134865)
[e-mail]
2 Deann Rivard (State Bar No. 177482)
[e-mail]
3 Jessica L. Becerra (State Bar No. 325884)
[e-mail]
4 MANNING & KASS
ELLROD, RAMIREZ, TRESTER LLP
5 801 S. Figueroa St, 15th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90017-3012
6 Telephone: [phone]
7 Attorneys for Defendants, COUNTY OF
VENTURA, a public entity; VENTURA
8 COUNTY OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY, a public entity
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION
11
Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM
IGNACIO IXTA, JR., individually;
12 A.I., a minor, by and through his
guardian ad litem, Wendy Galvan;
13 P.I.I., a minor by and through his
guardian ad litem, Ginger Martinez,
14
[DISCOVERY MATTER]
Plaintiffs,
15
STIPULATED
PROTECTIVE
v.
ORDER 1
16
COUNTY OF VENTURA, a public
17 entity; VENTURA COUNTY OFFICE
OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, a
18 public entity; CITY OF OXNARD, a
public entity; OXNARD POLICE
19 DEPARTMENT, a public entity;
EDWARD BALDWIN; individually
20 and in his official capacity as a peace
officer; ALEX ARNETT, individually
21 and in his official capacity as a peace
officer; CHRIS WILLIAMS,
22 individually and in his official capacity
as a peace officer; JOHN
23 CROMBACH, individually and in his
capacity as former Chief of Police of
24 the City of Oxnard; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive.
25
Defendants.
26
27

1

This Stipulated Protective Order is based substantially on the model protective
28 order provided under Magistrate Judge Alexander F. MacKinnon’s Procedures.
Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1.

A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS

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. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to
enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge 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.
B. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT
1.1.

Contentions re Harm from Disclosure of Confidential Materials.
Defendants contend that there is good cause and a particularized need

for a protective order to preserve the interests of confidentiality and privacy in peace
officer personnel file records and associated investigative or confidential records for
the following reasons.
First, Defendants contend that peace officers have a federal privilege of
privacy in their personnel file records: a reasonable expectation of privacy therein
that is underscored, specified, and arguably heightened by the Pitchess protective
procedure of California law. See Sanchez v. Santa Ana Police Dept., 936 F.2d 1027,
1033-1034 (9th Cir. 1990); Hallon v. City of Stockton, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
14665, *2-3, 12-13 (E.D. Cal. 2012) (concluding that “while “[f]ederal law applies
to privilege based discovery disputes involving federal claims,” the “state privilege
law which is consistent with its federal equivalent significantly assists in applying
[federal] privilege law to discovery disputes”); Soto v. City of Concord, 162 F.R.D.
603, 613 n. 4, 616 (N.D. Cal. 1995) (peace officers have constitutionally-based
2

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1 “privacy rights [that] are not inconsequential” in their police personnel records); cf.
2 Cal. Penal Code §§ 832.7, 832.8; Cal. Evid. Code §§ 1040-1047. Defendants
3 further contend that uncontrolled disclosure of such personnel file information can
4 threaten the safety of non-party witnesses, officers, and their families/associates.
5

Second, Defendants contend that municipalities and law enforcement

6 agencies have federal deliberative-executive process privilege, federal official
7 information privilege, federal law enforcement privilege, and federal attorney-client
8 privilege (and/or attorney work product protection) interests in the personnel files of
9 their peace officers – particularly as to those portions of peace officer personnel files
10 that contain critical self-analysis, internal deliberation/decision-making or
11 evaluation/analysis, or communications for the purposes of obtaining or rendering
12 legal advice or analysis – potentially including but not limited to
13 evaluative/analytical portions of Internal Affairs type records or reports,
14 evaluative/analytical portions of supervisory records or reports, and/or reports
15 prepared at the direction of counsel, or for the purpose of obtaining or rendering
16 legal advice. See Sanchez, 936 F.2d at 1033-1034; Maricopa Audubon Soc’y v.
17 United States Forest Serv., 108 F.3d 1089, 1092-1095 (9th Cir. 1997); Soto, 162
18 F.R.D. at 613, 613 n. 4; Kelly v. City of San Jose, 114 F.R.D. 654, 668-671 (N.D.
19 Cal. 1987); Tuite v. Henry, 181 F.R.D. 175, 176-177 (D. D.C. 1998); Hamstreet v.
20 Duncan, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89702 (D. Or. 2007); Admiral Ins. Co. v. United
21 States Dist. Ct., 881 F.2d 1486, 1492, 1495 (9th Cir. 1988). Defendants further
22 contend that such personnel file records are restricted from disclosure by the public
23 entity’s custodian of records pursuant to applicable California law and that
24 uncontrolled release is likely to result in needless intrusion of officer privacy;
25 impairment in the collection of third-party witness information and statements and
26 related legitimate law enforcement investigations/interests; and a chilling of open
27 and honest discussion regarding and/or investigation into alleged misconduct that
28 can erode a public entity’s ability to identify and/or implement any remedial
3

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1 measures that may be required.
2

Third, Defendants contend that, since peace officers do not have the

3 same rights as other private citizens to avoid giving compelled statements, it is
4 contrary to the fundamental principles of fairness to permit uncontrolled release of
5 officers’ compelled statements. See generally Lybarger v. City of Los Angeles, 40
6 Cal.3d 822, 828-830 (1985); cf. U.S. Const., amend V.
7

Accordingly, Defendants contend that, without a protective order

8 preventing such, production of confidential records in the case can and will likely
9 substantially impair and harm defendant public entity’s interests in candid self10 critical analysis, frank internal deliberations, obtaining candid information from
11 witnesses, preserving the safety of witnesses, preserving the safety of peace officers
12 and peace officers’ families and associates, protecting the privacy officers of peace
13 officers, and preventing pending investigations from being detrimentally
14 undermined by publication of private, sensitive, or confidential information – as can
15 and often does result in litigation.
16

1.2.

Plaintiffs do not agree with and do not stipulate to Defendants'

17 contentions herein above, and nothing in this Stipulation or its associated Order
18 shall resolve the parties’ disagreement, or bind them, concerning the legal
19 statements and claimed privileges set forth above.
20

However, plaintiffs agree that there is Good Cause for a Protective

21 Order so as to preserve the respective interests of the parties without the need to
22 further burden the Court with such issues. Specifically, the parties jointly contend
23 that, absent this Stipulation and its associated Protective Order, the parties'
24 respective privilege interests may be impaired or harmed, and that this Stipulation
25 and its associated Protective Order may avoid such harm by permitting the parties to
26 facilitate discovery with reduced risk that privileged and/or sensitive/confidential
27 information will become matters of public record.
28

1.3.

The parties jointly contend that there is typically a particularized
4

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1 need for protection as to any medical or psychotherapeutic records, and/or records
2 involving personal information of minor plaintiffs, and investigative source records
3 related to potential informants, because of the privacy interests at stake therein.
4 Because of these sensitive interests, a Court Order should address these documents
5 rather than a private agreement between the parties.
6

1.4.

The parties therefore stipulate that there is Good Cause for, and

7 hereby jointly request that the honorable Court issue/enter, a Protective Order re
8 confidential documents consistent with the terms and provisions of this Stipulation.
9 However, the entry of a Protective Order by the Court pursuant to this Stipulation
10 shall not be construed as any ruling by the Court on the aforementioned legal
11 statements or privilege claims in this section (§ 1), nor shall this section be
12 construed as part of any such Court Order.
13

Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt

14 resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately
15 protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the
16 parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in preparation for
17 and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of the litigation, and
18 serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this
19 matter. It is the intent of the parties that information will not be designated as
20 confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good
21 faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and
22 there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of this case.
23
24

C. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PROCEDURE FOR FILING UNDER SEAL

25

The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this

26 Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information
27 under seal; Local Civil Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed
28 and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court
5

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1 to file material under seal.
2

There is a strong presumption that the public has a right of access to judicial

3 proceedings and records in civil cases. In connection with non-dispositive motions,
4 good cause must be shown to support a filing under seal. See Kamakana v. City and
5 County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006), Phillips v. Gen. Motors
6 Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002), Makar-Welbon v. Sony Electrics,
7 Inc., 187 F.R.D. 576, 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999) (even stipulated protective orders
8 require good cause showing), and a specific showing of good cause or compelling
9 reasons with proper evidentiary support and legal justification, must be made with
10 respect to Protected Material that a party seeks to file under seal. The parties’ mere
11 designation of Disclosure or Discovery Material as CONFIDENTIAL does not—
12 without the submission of competent evidence by declaration, establishing that the
13 material sought to be filed under seal qualifies as confidential, privileged, or
14 otherwise protectable—constitute good cause.
15

Further, if a party requests sealing related to a dispositive motion or trial, then

16 compelling reasons, not only good cause, for the sealing must be shown, and the
17 relief sought shall be narrowly tailored to serve the specific interest to be protected.
18 See Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass’n., 605 F.3d 665, 677-79 (9th Cir. 2010). For
19 each item or type of information, document, or thing sought to be filed or introduced
20 under seal in connection with a dispositive motion or trial, the party seeking
21 protection must articulate compelling reasons, supported by specific facts and legal
22 justification, for the requested sealing order. Again, competent evidence supporting
23 the application to file documents under seal must be provided by declaration.
24

Any document that is not confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable in

25 its entirety will not be filed under seal if the confidential portions can be redacted. If
26 documents can be redacted, then a redacted version for public viewing, omitting
27 only the confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable portions of the document,
28 shall be filed. Any application that seeks to file documents under seal in their
6

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1 entirety should include an explanation of why redaction is not feasible.
2
3 2. DEFINITIONS
4

2.1 Action: [this pending federal law suit].

5

2.2 Challenging Party:

a Party or Non-Party that challenges the

6 designation of information or items under this Order.
7

2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless

8 of how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify
9 for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified
10 above in the Good Cause Statement.
11

2.4

Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as

12 well as their support staff).
13

2.5

Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates

14 information or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to
15 discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.”
16

2.6

Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information,

17 regardless of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or
18 maintained (including, among other things, testimony, transcripts, and
19 tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses to
20 discovery in this matter.
21

2.7

Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a

22 matter pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its
23 counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action.
24

2.8

House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this

25 Action. House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any
26 other outside counsel.
27

2.9

Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation,

28 association or other legal entity not named as a Party to this action.
7

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1

2.10 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a

2 party to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this
3 Action and have appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are
4 affiliated with a law firm that has appeared on behalf of that party, and
5 includes support staff.
6

2.11 Party: any party to this Action, including all of its officers,

7 directors, employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of
8 Record (and their support staffs).
9

2.12 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or

10 Discovery Material in this Action.
11

2.13 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation

12 support services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing
13 exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any
14 form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors.
15

2.14 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is

16 designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.”
17

2.15 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery

18 Material from a Producing Party.
19
20 3.
21

SCOPE

22

The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only

23 Protected Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted
24 from Protected Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations of
25 Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or presentations by Parties
26 or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material.
27

Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by the orders of the

28 trial judge. This Order does not govern the use of Protected Material at trial.
8

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1 4.

DURATION

2

Once a case proceeds to trial, information that was designated as

3 CONFIDENTIAL or maintained pursuant to this protective order used or introduced
4 as an exhibit at trial becomes public and will be presumptively available to all
5 members of the public, including the press, unless compelling reasons supported by
6 specific factual findings to proceed otherwise are made to the trial judge in advance
7 of the trial. See Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1180-81 (distinguishing “good cause”
8 showing for sealing documents produced in discovery from “compelling reasons”
9 standard when merits-related documents are part of court record). Accordingly, the
10 terms of this protective order do not extend beyond the commencement of the trial.
11 5.
12

DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL
5.1

Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection.

13 Each Party or Non-Party that designates information or items for protection under this
14 Order must take care to limit any such designation to specific material that qualifies
15 under the appropriate standards. The Designating Party must designate for protection
16 only those parts of material, documents, items, or oral or written communications that
17 qualify so that other portions of the material, documents, items, or communications
18 for which protection is not warranted are not swept unjustifiably within the ambit of
19 this Order.
20

Mass, indiscriminate, or routinized designations are prohibited. Designations

21 that are shown to be clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper
22 purpose (e.g., to unnecessarily encumber the case development process or to impose
23 unnecessary expenses and burdens on other parties) may expose the Designating Party
24 to sanctions.
25

If it comes to a Designating Party’s attention that information or items that it

26 designated for protection do not qualify for protection, that Designating Party must
27 promptly notify all other Parties that it is withdrawing the inapplicable designation.
28

5.2

Manner and Timing of Designations. Except as otherwise provided in
9

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1 this Order (see, e.g., second paragraph of section 5.2(a) below), or as otherwise
2 stipulated or ordered, Disclosure or Discovery Material that qualifies for protection
3 under this Order must be clearly so designated before the material is disclosed or
4 produced.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Designation in conformity with this Order requires:
(a) for information in documentary form (e.g., paper or electronic
documents, but excluding transcripts of depositions or other pretrial or trial
proceedings), that the Producing Party affix at a minimum, the legend
“CONFIDENTIAL” (hereinafter “CONFIDENTIAL legend”), to each page that
contains protected material. If only a portion or portions of the material on a page
qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected
portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).
A Party or Non-Party that makes original documents available for
inspection need not designate them for protection until after the inspecting Party has
indicated which documents it would like copied and produced. During the inspection
and before the designation, all of the material made available for inspection shall be
deemed “CONFIDENTIAL.” After the inspecting Party has identified the documents
it wants copied and produced, the Producing Party must determine which documents,
or portions thereof, qualify for protection under this Order. Then, before producing
the specified documents, the Producing Party must affix the “CONFIDENTIAL
legend” to each page that contains Protected Material. If only a portion or portions of
the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly
identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the
margins).
(b) for testimony given in depositions that the Designating Party identifies
the Disclosure or Discovery Material on the record, before the close of the deposition
all protected testimony.
10

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1

(c) for information produced in some form other than documentary and for

2 any other tangible items, that the Producing Party affix in a prominent place on the
3 exterior of the container or containers in which the information is stored the legend
4 “CONFIDENTIAL.” If only a portion or portions of the information warrants
5 protection, the Producing Party, to the extent practicable, shall identify the protected
6 portion(s).
7

5.3

Inadvertent Failures to Designate. If timely corrected, an inadvertent

8 failure to designate qualified information or items does not, standing alone, waive the
9 Designating Party’s right to secure protection under this Order for such material.
10 Upon timely correction of a designation, the Receiving Party must make reasonable
11 efforts to assure that the material is treated in accordance with the provisions of this
12 Order.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

6.

CHALLENGING CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS
6.1 Timing of Challenges. Any Party or Non-Party may challenge a

designation of confidentiality at any time that is consistent with the Court’s
Scheduling Order.
6.2 Meet and Confer. The Challenging Party shall initiate the dispute
resolution process under Local Rule 37.1 et seq.
6.3

Joint Stipulation. Any challenge submitted to the Court shall be

via a joint stipulation pursuant to Local Rule 37-2.
6.4

The burden of persuasion in any such challenge proceeding shall be on

the Designating Party. Frivolous challenges, and those made for an improper
purpose (e.g., to harass or impose unnecessary expenses and burdens on other
parties) may expose the Challenging Party to sanctions. Unless the Designating
Party has waived or withdrawn the confidentiality designation, all parties shall
continue to afford the material in question the level of protection to which it is

28
11

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1 entitled under the Producing Party’s designation until the Court rules on the
2 challenge.
3 7.

ACCESS TO AND USE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL

4

7.1

Basic Principles. A Receiving Party may use Protected Material that is

5 disclosed or produced by another Party or by a Non-Party in connection with this
6 Action only for prosecuting, defending, or attempting to settle this Action. Such
7 Protected Material may be disclosed only to the categories of persons and under the
8 conditions described in this Order. When the Action has been terminated, a Receiving
9 Party must comply with the provisions of section 13 below (FINAL DISPOSITION).
10

Protected Material must be stored and maintained by a Receiving Party at a

11 location and in a secure manner that ensures that access is limited to the persons
12 authorized under this Order.
13

7.2 Disclosure of “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items. Unless

14 otherwise ordered by the court or permitted in writing by the Designating Party, a
15 Receiving

Party

may

disclose

any

information

or

item

designated

16 “CONFIDENTIAL” only to:
17

(a) the Receiving Party’s Outside Counsel of Record in this Action, as well

18 as employees of said Outside Counsel of Record to whom it is reasonably necessary
19 to disclose the information for this Action;
20

(b) the officers, directors, and employees (Including House Counsel) of the

21 Receiving Party to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this Action;
22
(c) Experts (as defined in this Order) of the Receiving Party to whom
23 disclosure is reasonably necessary for this Action and who have signed the
24 “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A);
25
(d) the court and its personnel;
26

(e) court reporters and their staff;

27
28
12

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1

(f) professional jury or trial consultants, mock jurors, and Professional

2 Vendors to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this Action and who have
3 signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A);
4

(g) the author or recipient of a document containing the information or a

5 custodian or other person who otherwise possessed or knew the information;
6

(h) during their depositions, witnesses, and attorneys for witnesses, in the

7 Action to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary provided: (1) the deposing party
8 requests that the witness sign the form attached as Exhibit 1 hereto; and (2) they will
9 not be permitted to keep any confidential information unless they sign the
10 “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A), unless otherwise
11 agreed by the Designating Party or ordered by the court. Pages of transcribed
12 deposition testimony or exhibits to depositions that reveal Protected Material may be
13 separately bound by the court reporter and may not be disclosed to anyone except as
14 permitted under this Stipulated Protective Order; and
15

(i) any mediator or settlement officer, and their supporting personnel,

16 mutually agreed upon by any of the parties engaged in settlement discussions.
17
18 8. PROTECTED MATERIAL SUBPOENAED OR ORDERED PRODUCED IN
19 OTHER LITIGATION
20

If a Party is served with a subpoena or a court order issued in other litigation

21 that compels disclosure of any information or items designated in this Action as
22 "CONFIDENTIAL," that Party must:
23
24

(a) promptly notify in writing the Designating Party. Such notification
shall include a copy of the subpoena or court order;

25

(b) promptly notify in writing the party who caused the subpoena or order

26

to issue in the other litigation that some or all of the material covered by the subpoena

27

or order is subject to this Protective Order. Such notification shall include a copy of

28

this Stipulated Protective Order; and
13

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1
2
3

(c) cooperate with respect to all reasonable procedures sought to be
pursued by the Designating Party whose Protected Material may be affected.
If the Designating Party timely seeks a protective order, the Party served with

4 the subpoena or court order shall not produce any information designated in this action
5 as “CONFIDENTIAL” before a determination by the court from which the subpoena
6 or order issued, unless the Party has obtained the Designating Party’s permission. The
7 Designating Party shall bear the burden and expense of seeking protection in that court
8 of its confidential material and nothing in these provisions should be construed as
9 authorizing or encouraging a Receiving Party in this Action to disobey a lawful
10 directive from another court.
11
12 9. A NON-PARTY’S PROTECTED MATERIAL SOUGHT TO BE PRODUCED
13 IN THIS LITIGATION
14

(a) The terms of this Order are applicable to information produced by a

15

Non-Party in this Action and designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” Such information

16

produced by Non-Parties in connection with this litigation is protected by the

17

remedies and relief provided by this Order. Nothing in these provisions should be

18

construed as prohibiting a Non-Party from seeking additional protections.

19

(b) In the event that a Party is required, by a valid discovery request, to

20

produce a Non-Party’s confidential information in its possession, and the Party is

21

subject to an agreement with the Non-Party not to produce the Non-Party’s

22

confidential information, then the Party shall:

23

(1) promptly notify in writing the Requesting Party and the Non-Party

24 that some or all of the information requested is subject to a confidentiality agreement
25 with a Non-Party;
26

(2) promptly provide the Non-Party with a copy of the Stipulated

27 Protective Order in this Action, the relevant discovery request(s), and a reasonably
28 specific description of the information requested; and
14

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1

(3) make the information requested available for inspection by the

2 Non-Party, if requested.
(c) If the Non-Party fails to seek a protective order from this court within

3

4 14 days of receiving the notice and accompanying information, the Receiving Party
5 may produce the Non-Party’s confidential information responsive to the discovery
6 request. If the Non-Party timely seeks a protective order, the Receiving Party shall
7 not produce any information in its possession or control that is subject to the
8 confidentiality agreement with the Non-Party before a determination by the court.
9 Absent a court order to the contrary, the Non-Party shall bear the burden and expense
10 of seeking protection in this court of its Protected Material.
11
12

10.

UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL

13
14

If a Receiving Party learns that, by inadvertence or otherwise, it has disclosed

15 Protected Material to any person or in any circumstance not authorized under this
16 Stipulated Protective Order, the Receiving Party must immediately (a) notify in
17 writing the Designating Party of the unauthorized disclosures, (b) use its best efforts
18 to retrieve all unauthorized copies of the Protected Material, (c) inform the person or
19 persons to whom unauthorized disclosures were made of all the terms of this Order,
20 and (d) request such person or persons to execute the “Acknowledgment and
21 Agreement to Be Bound” that is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
22
23 11.

INADVERTENT PRODUCTION OF PRIVILEGED OR OTHERWISE

24 PROTECTED MATERIAL
25

When a Producing Party gives notice to Receiving Parties that certain

26 inadvertently produced material is subject to a claim of privilege or other protection,
27 the obligations of the Receiving Parties are those set forth in Federal Rule of Civil
28 Procedure 26(b)(5)(B). This provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure
15

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1 may be established in an e-discovery order that provides for production without prior
2 privilege review. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) and (e), insofar as the
3 parties reach an agreement on the effect of disclosure of a communication or
4 information covered by the attorney-client privilege or work product protection, the
5 parties may incorporate their agreement in the stipulated protective order submitted
6 to the court.
7
8 12.

MISCELLANEOUS

9

12.1 Right to Further Relief. Nothing in this Order abridges the right of any

10 person to seek its modification by the Court in the future.
11

12.2 Right to Assert Other Objections. By stipulating to the entry of this

12 Protective Order no Party waives any right it otherwise would have to object to
13 disclosing or producing any information or item on any ground not addressed in this
14 Stipulated Protective Order. Similarly, no Party waives any right to object on any
15 ground to use in evidence of any of the material covered by this Protective Order.
16

12.3 Filing Protected Material. A Party that seeks to file under seal any

17 Protected Material must comply with Civil Local Rule 79-5. Protected Material may
18 only be filed under seal pursuant to a court order authorizing the sealing of the specific
19 Protected Material at issue. If a Party's request to file Protected Material under seal is
20 denied by the court, then the Receiving Party may file the information in the public
21 record unless otherwise instructed by the court.
22
23 13.

FINAL DISPOSITION

24

After the final disposition of this Action, as defined in paragraph 4, within 60

25 days of a written request by the Designating Party, each Receiving Party must return
26 all Protected Material to the Producing Party or destroy such material. As used in this
27 subdivision, “all Protected Material” includes all copies, abstracts, compilations,
28 summaries, and any other format reproducing or capturing any of the Protected
16

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1 Material. Whether the Protected Material is returned or destroyed, the Receiving Party
2 must submit a written certification to the Producing Party (and, if not the same person
3 or entity, to the Designating Party) by the 60 day deadline that (1) identifies (by
4 category, where appropriate) all the Protected Material that was returned or destroyed
5 and (2) affirms that the Receiving Party has not retained any copies, abstracts,
6 compilations, summaries or any other format reproducing or capturing any of the
7 Protected Material. Notwithstanding this provision, Counsel are entitled to retain an
8 archival copy of all pleadings, motion papers, trial, deposition, and hearing
9 transcripts, legal memoranda, correspondence, deposition and trial exhibits, expert
10 reports, attorney work product, and consultant and expert work product, even if such
11 materials contain Protected Material. Any such archival copies that contain or
12 constitute Protected Material remain subject to this Protective Order as set forth in
13 Section 4 (DURATION).
14
15 14.

VIOLATION

16 Any violation of this Order may be punished by any and all appropriate measures
17 including, without limitation, contempt proceedings and/or monetary sanctions.
18
19 IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.
20 ///
21 ///
22 ///
23 ///
24 ///
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
17

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1 Dated: July 31, 2022
2
3

MANNING & KASS
ELLROD, RAMIREZ, TRESTER LLP
By:

4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Dated: July 27, 2022

/s/ Deann R. Rivard
Eugene P. Ramirez
Deann R. Rivard
Jessica L. Becerra
Attorneys For Defendants County of
Ventura, Ventura County District
Attorney's Office

BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP

11
By:

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Dated: July 27, 2022

19
21

Mark Pachowicz
Jennie Hendrickson
Attorneys for Plaintiff Ignacio Ixta, Jr.

22
24
25
26
27
28

PACHOWICZ | GOLDENRING APLC
By: /s/ Jennie Hendrickson
_____________________________

20

23

/s/ Susan Coleman
Susan Coleman
Attorney For Defendants City of Oxnard
(Also Sued Herein As Oxnard Police
Department), Edward Baldwin, Alex
Arnett, Chris Williams, and John
Cromback

Dated: August 1, 2022

SONIA MERCADO AND ASSOCIATES
By: /s/ Sonia Mercado
_____________________________
Sonia Mercado
Attorney for Plaintiff P.I.I., a minor, by and
through his guardian ad litem, Ginger Martinez
18

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1
2

Dated: August 1, 2022

3

LAW OFFICES OF JONNY RUSSELL
By: /s/ Jonny Russell
_____________________________

4

Jonny Russell
Attorney for Plaintiff A.I., a minor, by and
through his guardian ad litem, Wendy Galvan

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15 DATED: 8/2/2022
16
17
18
19 HON. ALEXANDER F. MACKINNON
United States Magistrate Judge
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
19

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM

1

EXHIBIT A

2

ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND AGREEMENT TO BE BOUND

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

I, ____________________________________________[print or type full name], of
____________________________[print or type full address], declare under
penalty of perjury that I have read in its entirety and understand the Stipulated
Protective Order that was issued by the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on ________[date] in the case of Ignacio Ixta Jr., et al v.
County of Ventura, et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM. I agree to comply
with and to be bound by all the terms of this Stipulated Protective Order and I
understand and acknowledge that failure to so comply could expose me to sanctions
and punishment in the nature of contempt. I solemnly promise that I will not disclose
in any manner any information or item that is subject to this Stipulated Protective
Order to any person or entity except in strict compliance with the provisions of this
Order.
I further agree to submit to the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for
the Central District of California for the purpose of enforcing the terms of this
Stipulated Protective Order, even if such enforcement proceedings occur after

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

termination of this action. I hereby appoint ___________________________ [print
or type full name] of _______________________________________ [print or type
full address and telephone number] as my California agent for service of process
in connection with this action or any proceedings related to enforcement of this
Stipulated Protective Order.
Date: ______________________________________

25 City and State where sworn and signed: __________________________________
26 Printed name: ________________________________________
27 Signature:__________________________________
28
20

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 2:22-cv-02468-MCS-AFM