Tommy Contreras v. Kohl s Department Stores, Inc. et al
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER RE: STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato re Stipulation for Protective Order 62 The parties are advised that the Court declines to issue the proposed protective order to which they have stipulated. (SEE DOCUMENTS FOR COMPLETE DETAILS) (dts)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
EDCV 16-2678-JGB (KKx)
Date: September 5, 2017
Title: Tommy Contreras v. Kohl’s Department Stores, Inc., et al.
Present: The Honorable KENLY KIYA KATO, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s):
Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s):
Order re: Stipulated Protective Order [Dkt. 62]
The parties’ proposed Stipulation and Protective Order has been referred by the District
Judge to the Magistrate Judge for consideration. The parties are advised that the Court declines
to issue the proposed protective order to which they have stipulated for the following reasons:
While the Court is willing to enter a protective order in accordance with the
parties’ stipulation in order to facilitate the conduct of discovery, the Court is unwilling to
include in the protective order any provisions relating to evidence presented at trial or other
court hearings or proceedings. Any use of Protected Material at trial or other court hearings
or proceedings shall be governed by the orders of the trial judge. Proposed ¶ 3 must be
amended to include language to make this explicit.
Proposed ¶ 7.2(e) must be revised to make clear that the terms of the Protective
Order do not apply to the Court and court personnel, including the Court’s court reporters, who
are subject only to the Court’s internal procedures regarding the handling of material filed or
lodged, including material filed or lodged under seal.
Proposed ¶ 6.1 needs to be revised to make clear that any motion challenging a
party’s designation of material as Confidential Information or seeking to modify or amend the
proposed Protective Order must be brought in strict compliance with Local Rules 37-1 and 37-2
(including the Joint Stipulation requirement). In addition, proposed ¶ 6.1 must be revised to
Page 1 of 2
Initials of Deputy Clerk __
make clear that any challenges to a designation of confidentiality may be made at any time that is
consistent with the Court’s Scheduling Order.
The parties are further directed to the Court’s sample stipulated protective order
located on the Court’s website for a sample of the format of an approved stipulated
protective order. The parties are strongly encouraged to use the language contained in the
approved stipulated protective order.
United States District Judge Jesus G. Bernal
Page 2 of 2
Initials of Deputy Clerk __
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?