Mitchell v. Felker et al

Filing 123

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 09/17/12 regarding confidential material. (See order for further details) (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 PRISON LAW OFFICE DONALD SPECTER (SBN 83925) REBEKAH EVENSON (SBN 207825) 1917 Fifth Street Berkeley, California 94710-1916 Telephone: 510.280.2621 Facsimile: 510.280.2704 dspecter@prisonlaw.com revenson@prisonlaw.com 11 BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP WARREN E. GEORGE (SBN 53588) MANU PRADHAN (SBN 253026) HEATHER SHOOK (SBN 268716) Three Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111-4067 Telephone: 415.393.2000 Facsimile: 415.393.2286 warren.george@bingham.com manu.pradhan@bingham.com heather.shook@bingham.com 12 KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General of California DAMON G. McCLAIN, (SBN 209508) Deputy Attorney General CHRISTOPHER J. BECKER, (SBN 230529) Deputy Attorney General ERIN SULLIVAN (SBN 242757) Deputy Attorney General 455 Golden Gate Ave., Suite 11000 San Francisco, Ca 94102-7004 Telephone: 415.703.5750 Facsimile: 415.703.5843 Email: Damon.McClain@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for Plaintiffs 7 8 9 10 Attorneys for Defendants 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 16 ROBERT MITCHELL, et al., Case No. 2:08-CV-01196 JAM EFB 17 --------STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER Plaintiffs, 18 v. 19 MATTHEW CATE, et al., 20 Defendants. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 STIPULATION AND - - - - - - - - - PROTECTIVE ORDER [PROPOSED] 1 2 IT IS STIPULATED BY THE PARTIES, BY AND THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL, AND ORDERED BY THE COURT AS FOLLOWS: 3 A. CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL AND INFORMATION SUBJECT TO THIS PROTECTIVE ORDER 4 The parties shall be entitled to designate in good faith which discovery responses are 5 confidential. The criteria for such a designation shall be whether a party believes in good faith 6 that the information is entitled to protection from disclosure under California state law, including 7 but not limited to the names and numbers of prisoners, confidential employment records for 8 CDCR Employees, and information that might compromise the safety or security of a prison or 9 prisoner. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 B. CONDITIONS FOR RELEASE OF CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS 1. Any party may designate discovery responses, documents produced in discovery, or deposition transcripts as confidential by producing such documents on pink or lilac-colored paper, by stamping them as “confidential” on their face, by watermarking them, or by other mutually agreeable means. If a party does not indicate that a particular Document is confidential at the time it is produced, it will be presumed not confidential, without prejudice to the party’s right to assert confidentiality at a later time. 2. Plaintiffs’ counsel is prohibited from disclosing any confidential documents or information to Plaintiffs, any other inmate presently or previously in the custody of CDCR, any relatives or associates of an inmate presently or previously in the custody of the CDCR, or any other member of the public, except as described in Paragraph 3 below. 3. Unless the Court Orders otherwise, confidential documents and the information contained therein may be disclosed only to the following persons: a. Counsel of record; b. Paralegal, attorney, stenographic, clerical, and secretarial personnel employed by counsel of record; c. Court personnel, stenographic reporters, and videographers engaged in such proceedings that are incidental to preparation for the trial in this action; 28 2 STIPULATION AND - - - - - - - - - PROTECTIVE ORDER [PROPOSED] 1 2 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 d. Any outside expert or consultant retained by the parties for purposes of this litigation; and e. Non-inmate witnesses to whom the documents and the information contained in the documents may be disclosed during, or in preparation for, a deposition taken in this matter, or otherwise during the preparation for trial and during trial, provided that the witness may not leave any deposition with copies of any of the confidential documents, and shall be informed of and shall agree to be bound by the terms of this order. 4. Each person to whom the parties’ counsel disclose confidential information shall, prior to the time of disclosure, be provided with a written notice. The notice shall specify that the documents and information shall not be disclosed except as provided herein, that the documents and information are subject to this protective order in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, and that a violation of the confidentiality provisions may lead to enforcement action, including, but not limited to, any proceeding for civil or criminal contempt. 5. Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ counsel, including paralegal, stenographic, clerical, and secretarial personnel employed by counsel of record shall not make copies of the confidential documents, or provide originals to anybody, except as necessary for purposes of this litigation, Mitchell v. Cate, et al., USDC, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:08-CV01196 JAM EFB, including appeals. Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ counsel are responsible to ensure that these individuals comply with this protective order. 6. At the conclusion of this litigation, including appeals, all confidential documents, including copies, shall be destroyed or returned to the producing party. 7. All confidential documents and the information contained therein shall be used solely in connection with this litigation, including appeals, and not for any other purpose, including other litigation. 8. All confidential documents that are filed with the Court shall be filed with a request to seal documents in accordance with Eastern District of California Local Rule 141. 28 3 STIPULATION AND - - - - - - - - - PROTECTIVE ORDER [PROPOSED] 1 2 3 4 5 under seal, labeled with a cover sheet bearing the case name along with the following statement: “This document is subject to a protective order issued by the Court and shall not be examined or copied except in compliance with that order.” Upon failure of the filing party to file confidential documents under seal in accordance with Local Rule 141, any party may request that the Court place the document under seal. 6 7 8 9 9. employees of the State of California, or other authorized government officials, from having access to confidential documents to which they would have access in the normal course of their official duties. 10 11 10. a. b. c. To object to a discovery request. 11. 17 19 To apply to the Court for an order removing the confidential material designation from any documents; or 16 18 To apply to the Court for a further protective order relating to any confidential documents or material, or relating to discovery in this litigation; 14 15 The provisions of this protective order are without prejudice to the right of any party: 12 13 Nothing in this protective order is intended to prevent officials or This Protective Order shall be binding on the parties as of the date it is signed by the parties. The provisions of this order shall remain in full force and effect until further order of this Court. 20 C. 21 HANDLING OF CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS AT TRIAL To the extent any party seeks to use documents designated as 22 “confidential” as exhibits at trial, the parties shall meet and confer in an attempt to obtain 23 agreement regarding the handling of such materials during trial, and either party may petition the 24 court for a resolution of this matter, as provided in Local Rule 141.1(b)(2). 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 4 STIPULATION AND - - - - - - - - - PROTECTIVE ORDER [PROPOSED] 1 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 2 3 September 13, 2012 /s/ DAMON MCCLAIN Attorneys for Defendants _______ September 13, 2012 /s/ REBEKAH EVENSON Attorneys for Plaintiffs _______ 4 5 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 Dated: September 17, 2012. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER

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?