e-ImageData Corp. v. Digital Check Corp.

Filing 16

PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jay C. Gandhi re Stipulation for Protective Order 15 . (kh)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DIVISION OF THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11

e-ImageData Corp.,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14

v.

Case No. 8:16-mc-00026-CJC (JCGx)
[Case No. 2:15-cv-658-LA Pending in the
Eastern District of Wisconsin]
PROTECTIVE ORDER

Digital Check Corp. d/b/a ST Imaging,

15
Defendant.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

LEWIS

The Court has reviewed plaintiff e-ImageData Corp.’s (“e-Image”) and third party
Total Imaging Solutions’ (“TIS”) Stipulation (dated January 11, 2017; the “Stipulation”),
whereby the parties agreed to adopt and be bound by the Protective Order already in
place in the underlying lawsuit, e-ImageData Corp. v. Digital Check Corp. d/b/a ST
Imaging, Case No. 15-cv-00658-RTR (U.S.D.C., E.D. of Wis.), with the additional
provision that TIS shall have all the rights of a party as set forth therein (the “Additional
Provision”). Based on the representations made by e-Image and TIS in that Stipulation
and its own review of this matter, this Court hereby finds and ORDERS as follows:
1.

November 12, 2015 in the matter of e-ImageData Corp. v. Digital Check Corp. d/b/a ST
Imaging, Case No. 15-cv-00658-RTR (the “Wisconsin Protective Order”), attached to the

BRISBOIS 28
BISGAARD
& SMITH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

The Protective Order entered by the Honorable Rudolph T. Randa on

4826-7659-0656.1

1 Stipulation as Exhibit A, is hereby entered in this matter.
2

2.

The Court further modifies the Wisconsin Protective Order so as to provide

3 full rights and privileges thereunder to TIS as if it were a “party” in the underlying
4 proceeding and so as to attach the Additional Provision, which is also a part of Exhibit A
5 to the Stipulation.
6

3.

Good cause exists for the entry of this Order as the parties in good faith

7 believe that certain information in the instant discovery proceeding may yield information
8 which either party could consider trade secrets, proprietary information, confidential
9 research and development information, and/or nonpublic technical, commercial, financial,
10 personal or business information that the parties respectively wish to maintain in
11 confidence in the ordinary course of business as contemplated by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)
12 and Civil L. R. 37. Plaintiff and TIS also operate in the same industry, servicing the same
13 or similar customers, and as such they reasonably believe that public disclosure of such
14 confidential information would cause financial and competitive harm to the disclosing
15 party.
16 Dated this 12th day of January, 2017
17
18

The Honorable Jay C. Gandhi
United States Magistrate Judge
United States District Court,
Central District of California

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

LEWIS

BRISBOIS
BISGAARD
& SMITH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

27
28
4826-7659-0656.1

2