Caruso v. Johnson et al

Filing 125

ORDER rejecting stipulated protective order signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 2/27/2019. (Rooney, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
GINA CARUSO,

Case No. 1:15-cv-00780-AWI-EPG

10
Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14
15

ORDER REJECTING STIPULATED
PROTECTIVE ORDER

v.

(ECF No. 119)

OFFICER G. SOLORIO, et al.,
Defendants.

On February 20, 2019, the parties filed a Stipulated Protective Order. (ECF No. 119.)

16

“The court may, for good cause, issue an order to protect a party or person from annoyance,

17

embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). “In the federal

18

judicial system trial and pretrial proceedings are ordinarily to be conducted in public.” Olympic

19

Ref. Co. v. Carter, 332 F.2d 260, 264 (9th Cir. 1964) (“The purpose of the federal discovery

20

rules, as pointed out in Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 501, 67 S.Ct. 385, 91 L.Ed. 451, is to

21

force a full disclosure.”) “As a general rule, the public is permitted ‘access to litigation

22

documents and information produced during discovery.’” In re Roman Catholic Archbishop of

23

Portland in Oregon, 661 F.3d 417, 424 (9th Cir. 2011) (quoting Phillips v. Gen. Motors Corp.,

24

307 F.3d 1206, 1210 (9th Cir.2002) and citing San Jose Mercury News, Inc. v. U.S. Dist. Court,

25

187 F.3d 1096, 1103 (9th Cir.1999) (“It is well-established that the fruits of pretrial discovery

26

are, in the absence of a court order to the contrary, presumptively public.”)).

27
28

Eastern District of California Local Rule 141.1 governs the entry of orders protecting
confidential information in this District and provides that “All information provided to the Court

1

1

in a specific action is presumptively public… Confidential information exchanged through

2

discovery, contained in documents to be filed in an action, or presented at a hearing or trial

3

otherwise may be protected by seeking a protective order as described herein.” Local Rule

4

141.1(a)(1). Part (c) contains the requirements for a proposed protective order:

5
6

(c) Requirements of a Proposed Protective Order. All stipulations and motions seeking
the entry of a protective order shall be accompanied by a proposed form of order. Every
proposed protective order shall contain the following provisions:

7

(1) A description of the types of information eligible for protection under the
order, with the description provided in general terms sufficient to reveal the
nature of the information (e.g., customer list, formula for soda, diary of a troubled
child);

8
9

(2) A showing of particularized need for protection as to each category of
information proposed to be covered by the order; and

10
11

(3) A showing as to why the need for protection should be addressed by a court
order, as opposed to a private agreement between or among the parties.

12
13
14

Local Rule 141.1(c).
The Stipulated Protective Order (ECF No. 119) submitted by the parties for Court

15

approval is rejected because it fails to comply with Local Rule 141.1(c). However, the parties

16

are granted leave to re-submit a compliant stipulated protective order for Court approval.

17
18
IT IS SO ORDERED.
19
20

Dated:

February 27, 2019

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2