Aguayo Jr. v. Georgia-Pacific Corrugated LLC

Filing 15

ORDER REJECTING stipulated protective order, document 14 , signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 11/16/2020. (Rooney, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SALVADOR AGUAYO, JR., Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 14 GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORRUGATED LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-00264-NONE-EPG ORDER REJECTING STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER (ECF No. 14) 15 Defendant. 16 17 On November 10, 2020, the parties filed a stipulated protective order. (ECF No. 14.) As 18 discussed below, the Stipulated Protective Order is rejected without prejudice because it cites to 19 the United States District Court for the Northern District of California’s local rules. Paragraph C of the parties’ stipulated protective order states that “Local Civil Rule 79-5 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal.” (Id.) Paragraphs 6.1 and 6.3 of the Stipulated Protective Order further indicate that challenges to designations of confidentiality shall be initiated “under Local Rule 37-1 et seq.” and “shall be via joint stipulation pursuant to Local Rule 37-2.” (Id.) Paragraph 12.3 likewise provides that “[a] Party that seeks to file under seal any Protected Material must comply with Local Civil Rule 79-5.” (Id.) The parties’ stipulation appears to refer to the Northern District of California’s local rules. Given that those local rules do not apply in this District, the Court rejects the stipulated 1 protective order without prejudice to the parties refiling a stipulated protective order for Court 2 approval with proper references to this Court’s local rules. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 16, 2020 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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?