AmTrust Financial Services, Inc. v. Old Republic General Insurance Corporation

Filing 31

(IN CHAMBERS) Order Denying Without Prejudice Joint Application for Entry of a Stipulated Protective Order (ECF 30) by Magistrate Judge Stephanie S. Christensen re Stipulation for Protective Order 30 (tsn)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. 2:24-cv-04246-HDV-SSC
Title

Date: March 10, 2025

AmTrust Financial Services, Inc. v. Old Republic General
Insurance Corporation

Present: The Honorable Stephanie S. Christensen, U.S. Magistrate Judge
Teagan Snyder
Deputy Clerk

n/a
Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:
None Present

Attorneys Present for Defendants:
None Present

Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) Order Denying Without
Prejudice Joint Application for Entry of a Stipulated Protective
Order (ECF 30)
On March 6, 2025, Plaintiff AmTrust Financial Services, Inc. and
Defendant Old Republic General Insurance Corporation filed a joint
application for entry of a stipulated protective order. (ECF 30.) The
Court has reviewed the proposed stipulated protective order and has
determined that, in its current form, it cannot be granted.
The proposed stipulated protective order includes the following
statement: “Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are 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.”

CV-90 (03/15)

Civil Minutes – General

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. 2:24-cv-04246-HDV-SSC
Title

Date: March 10, 2025

AmTrust Financial Services, Inc. v. Old Republic General
Insurance Corporation

(ECF 30 at 1.) To the extent that the parties intended this to constitute
the required good-cause statement, such language is insufficient. See
Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th
Cir. 2006); Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1130
(9th Cir. 2003).
In any revised stipulated protective order submitted to the Court,
the parties must include a statement demonstrating good cause for
entry of a protective order pertaining to the documents or information
described in the order. The documents to be protected shall be
specifically described and identified. The paragraph containing the
statement of good cause should be preceded by the phrase: “GOOD
CAUSE STATEMENT.” The parties shall articulate, for each document
or category of documents they seek to protect, the specific prejudice or
harm that will result if no protective order is entered.
In sum, the joint request for approval of the stipulated protective
order (ECF 30) is DENIED without prejudice to renewing the request.
The parties may re-file a revised proposed stipulated protective order
that cures the deficiencies set forth in this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (03/15)

Civil Minutes – General

:
ts

Page 2 of 2