Roussan Joshua Collins v. City of Anaheim et al

Filing 15

PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Douglas F. McCormick re Stipulation 14 . (mba)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ANAHEIM CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE MOSES W. JOHNSON, IV (SBN 118769) Assistant City Attorney E-mail: GREGG M. AUDET (SBN 158682) E-mail: 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 356 Anaheim, California 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5169 Fax: (714) 765-5123 Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF ANAHEIM, RICHARD BOYER, ROBERT CONKLIN, MICHAEL LOZEAU and SAL PISCOPO 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROUSSAN JOSHUA COLLINS, 12 13 14 15 16 Case No.: 8:17-cv-01611 DOC (DFMx) Plaintiff, v. CITY OF ANAHEIM; RICHARD BOYER; ROBERT CONKLIN; MICHAEL LOZEAU; SAL PISCOPO; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, 17 Defendants. PROTECTIVE ORDER RE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION [Discovery Document: Referred to Magistrate Judge Douglas F. McCormick] Action Filed: Trial Date: 9/15/2017 None set 18 19 20 On or about October 23, 2017, the parties stipulated to a protective order 21 regarding confidential information and seek to have a protective order entered by 22 the Court based on that stipulation. The stipulation has been filed with the Court. 23 Based on that Stipulation and it appearing that the information is confidential and 24 good cause appearing therefor, the following Protective Order shall apply to any 25 Documents produced by Defendants to Plaintiff's counsel in this action: 26 1. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT: This action involves information 27 for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose 28 other than prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential materials Case No. 8:17-cv-01611 DOC (DFMx) 1 and information consist of the Internal Affairs Investigation and the City of 2 Anaheim Police Department's Body Worn Camera videos (which includes 3 information implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise 4 generally unavailable to the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise 5 protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case 6 decisions, or common law. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to 7 facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery 8 materials, to adequately protect information the parties are entitled to keep 9 confidential, to ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of 10 such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their 11 handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective 12 order for such information is justified in this matter. 13 2. The Attorneys for the Plaintiff shall receive from the Defendants a 14 copy of the Internal Affairs Investigation and the Anaheim Police Department 15 Body Worn Camera videos in connection with the incident and arrest of Plaintiff 16 (“File”). 17 3. Attorneys for the Plaintiff shall personally secure and maintain the 18 File in their possession to the end that the File is to be used only for the purposes 19 set forth below and for no other purpose. 20 4. Plaintiff's counsel’s copy of the investigation File shall only be used 21 for preparing for and prosecuting this case pending the completion of the judicial 22 process including appeal, if any. No copies of the File shall be made, except to 23 provide a copy to an expert who must agree to be bound by the Protective Order. 24 5. If necessary in the judgment of the attorneys for the Plaintiff in this 25 case, they may make a copy of the File for their expert if the same may actively 26 assist in the prosecution of this case, as long as the expert agrees to be bound by 27 the terms of this Protective Order. No other copies may be made. 28 /// 2 Case No. 8:17-cv-01611 DOC (DFMx) 1 6. Duration: Once a case proceeds to trial, all of the information that 2 was designated as confidential or maintained pursuant to this protective order 3 becomes public unless compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings 4 to proceed otherwise are made to the trial judge in advance of the trial. 5 Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu (9th Cir. 2006) 447 F.3d 1172, 1180- 6 1181 (distinguishing "good cause" showing for sealing documents produced in 7 discovery from "compelling reasons" standard when merits-related 8 documents are part of court record). Accordingly, the terms of this protective 9 order do not extend beyond the commencement of the trial. 10 7. Final Disposition: After the final disposition of this Action, 11 Plaintiff's Counsel shall return all Protected Material and/or Confidential 12 Information to counsel for the City or shall destroy such material, including all 13 copies and extracts thereof, abstracts, compilations, summaries, and any other 14 format reproducing or capturing any of the Protected Material and/or 15 Confidential Information with the exception of those documents affected by the 16 attorney work-product doctrine or attorney-client privilege. Notwithstanding this 17 provision, Counsel are entitled to retain an archival copy of all pleadings, motion 18 papers, trial, deposition, and hearing transcripts, legal memoranda, 19 correspondence, deposition and trial exhibits, expert reports, attorney work 20 product, and consultant and expert work product, even if such materials contain 21 material Protected Material and/or Confidential Information produced subject to 22 this order. Any such archival copies that contain or constitute Protected Material 23 and/or Confidential Information remain subject to this Protective Order. 24 8. Attorneys for the Plaintiff shall cause the substance of this order to 25 be communicated to each person to whom the File is revealed in accordance with 26 this order and prior to disclosure of the Confidential Information, have such 27 person execute a written Understanding and Agreement to be bound by this 28 Stipulation for Protective Order in the form attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 3 Case No. 8:17-cv-01611 DOC (DFMx) 1 9. The attorneys for the Plaintiff shall not cause or knowingly permit 2 disclosure of the contents of the File beyond the disclosure permitted under the 3 terms and conditions of this order, including but not limited to any news media 4 which is inclusive of film or video, television, radio or print. 5 FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, IT IS SO ORDERED: 6 7 Dated: October 25, 2017 HON. DOUGLAS F. MC CORMICK United States Magistrate Judge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 Case No. 8:17-cv-01611 DOC (DFMx) 1 EXHIBIT 1 2 UNDERSTANDING AND AGREEMENT TO BE BOUND 3 PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER 4 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of 5 America that I have read in its entirety and understand the Stipulation and 6 Protective Order that was issued by the United States District Court for the 7 Central District of California in the case of COLLINS v. CITY OF ANAHEIM, 8 et al., Case No. SACV 17-0611 DOC (DFMx), now pending in the District 9 Court. I understand the Stipulation and Protective Order and agree to comply 10 with and to be bound by all the terms of the Stipulation and Protective Order. I 11 solemnly promise that I will not disclose in any manner any information or item 12 that is subject to the Stipulation and Protective Order to any person or entity 13 except in strict compliance with the provisions of the Stipulation and Protective 14 Order. 15 16 DATED:_______________ 17 By: 18 19 SIGNATURE _________________________________ PRINT NAME _________________________________ ADDRESS _________________________________ CITY, STATE, ZIP 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 125097v1 5 Case No. 8:17-cv-01611 DOC (DFMx)

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?