Antonio Ortiz et al v. City of Fullerton et al

Filing 32

PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Douglas F. McCormick; Re Production of Records from Orange County District Attorney Pursuant to Third-Party Subpoena. (mba)

1 Thomas E. Beck, Esq. (SBN. 81557)
THE BECK LAW FIRM
2 10377 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Los Alamitos, California 90720
3 Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
4 Email: [e-mail]
5 Attorneys for Plaintiff ANTONIO ORTIZ
6 David Haas, Esq. (SBN 165,349)
LAW OFFICES OF DAVID HAAS
7 6285 E. Spring St. Suite 210
Long Beach, California 90808
8 Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
9 Email: [e-mail]
10 Attorneys for Plaintiff LUIZ ORTIZ
11
12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
15
)
)
16
)
v.
)
17
)
)
18 CITY OF FULLERTON, BRYAN
)
BYBEE# 1398, individually and as a
19 peace officer, MATTHEW MARTINEZ )
)
#1348, individually and as a peace
20 officer, EMMANUEL PULIDO #1327, )
)
individually and as a peace officer,
21 BILLY PHU #1332,individually and as a )
)
peace officer, DOES 1-10, inclusive.
)
22
)
Defendants.
)
23
14 ANTONIO ORTIZ, LUIZ ORTIZ,

24

No. CV 16-01499 DOC (DFMx)

PROTECTIVE ORDER
REGARDING PRODUCTION
OF RECORDS FROM ORANGE
COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY PURSUANT TO
THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENA

Having reviewed the Stipulation by and between Plaintiff, EDWARD REZEK,

25 and third-party witness and custodian of records, Orange County District Attorney’s
26 Office (“OCDA”), and their attorneys of record, and in response to Plaintiff’s October
27 28, 2016 SDT to OCDA, and GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the Court ORDERS the
28 following:

1

OCDA shall produce all responsive records to the subpoena; provided all

2 records produced, (“Responsive records”) be subject to the following ORDER:
3

1.

The attorneys of record for Plaintiff and their staff, and any other attorney who

4 receives said Responsive Records shall not copy nor reproduce any portion of said
5 Records, except where necessary to submit to the Court. If any Responsive Record or
6 Transcript is required to be submitted to the court, it shall be done so under seal, in
7 connection with court proceedings;
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

2.

No part of the Responsive Records disclosed pursuant to this Protective Order

shall be given to any party to the present action without first agreeing to be bound by
the protective order. The Responsive Records produced by OCDA pursuant to this
Stipulated Protective Order shall be used solely in connection with the case of
Antonio Ortiz, Luiz Ortiz v. City of Fullerton, et al., Case No. CV 16-01499 DOC
(DFMx) including any associated appellate proceedings and collateral review, and not
for any other purpose;

15
16
17

3.

The Responsive Records produced to Plaintiff’s counsel and any other

attorneys of record in the present matter shall not be provided to any other third party,

18 excluding this Court and Court personnel, not specifically identified within the present
19 order;
20
21

4.

If any other party to this civil litigation requests copies of the Responsive

22 Records produced by the OCDA, counsel for OCDA shall first provide a copy of the
23 Stipulated Protective Order to the requesting party. The requesting party shall
24 confirm in writing that both the party and their attorney(s) of record shall be bound
25 by the terms of the Stipulated Protective Order prior to disclosure of the requested
26 records. The writing must also include consent by the party to whom disclosure is
27 going to be made, to be subject to the jurisdiction of this Court with respect to any
28 proceeding related to the enforcement of this Stipulated Protective Order, including

1 but not limited to a proceeding for contempt. Nothing in this Order shall be construed
2 as authorizing a party to disobey a lawful subpoena issued in another action.
3
4

5.

Upon receipt of the acknowledgment, OCDA will produce to the requesting

5 party’s attorney a full set of the Responsive Records,
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

6.

At the conclusion of this matter, whether through trial, appeal, collateral

review, or other final disposition, all Responsive Records produced pursuant to the
Subpoena and this Stipulated Protective Order, and all copies shall be destroyed or
returned to OCDA at the option of the attorneys of record for Plaintiff and any other
attorney of record for a party to the present action who received the Responsive
Records;
7.

The production of Responsive Records and Testimony by OCDA pursuant to

this Order shall not be deemed a waiver of the federal investigation privilege for any
future purpose;

16
17

8.

Attorneys, the parties and their respective employees, agents and other

18 representatives, including investigators, are ordered not to disclose to any person or
19 entity information obtained from the records without prior order of this Court;
20
21

9.

This Order prohibiting any dissemination and disclosure of information from

22 the documents and depositions applies in any further discovery proceedings; and
23
24

10.

If Plaintiff, Plaintiff’s counsel, or any other person or entity seeks relief from

25 this Order, an appropriate noticed motion is to be served on the Orange County
26 District Attorney, through his attorney of record, and all other parties.
27 ////
28 ////

GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT

1
2

Plaintiff and third-party OCDA, believe that the responsive records listed above

3 are described with sufficient particularity to comply with Ninth Circuit standards for
4 protective orders.
OCDA further believes that the disclosure of the responsive records
5

would

6 violate State Constitutional privacy rights of the individuals named within the records
7 and that the records are protected under federal official information privilege.
8
9
10
11
12
13

While Plaintiff disagrees with the grounds for OCDA’s aforementioned
objections to Plaintiff’s SDT, Plaintiff has agreed to stipulate to this protective order
in the interest of avoiding unnecessary litigation.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: December 19, 2016

THE BECK LAW FIRM

14
15

By: /s/ Thomas E. Beck
Thomas E. Beck, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
Antonio Ortiz

16
17
18 Dated: December 19, 2016
19

ORANGE COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY

20

By: /s/Ray Armstrong
Ray Armstrong, Senior
Deputy District Attorney
for custodian of records
Orange County District
Attorney

21
22
23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26 DATED: December 27, 2016
27
28

_____________________________
Douglas F. McCormick
United States District Court
Magistrate Judge