Chopourian v. Catholic Healthcare West et al

Filing 63

AMENDED STIPULATION and ORDER Relating to video recording of document review and defendant's motion for protective order regarding the video recording signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/7/11. (Matson, R)

1
2
3
4
5

JUDITH CLARK MARTIN, STATE BAR NO. 173557
MARY E. “MOLLY” GREENE, STATE BAR NO. 186205
LA FOLLETTE, JOHNSON,
DE HAAS, FESLER & AMES
655 University Avenue, Suite 119
Sacramento, California 95825
Phone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
Email:
[e-mail]

6
7
8

Attorneys for Defendant,
CATHOLIC HEALTHCARE WEST dba
MERCY GENERAL HOSPITAL (erroneously
sued and served herein as CATHOLIC HEALTHCARE
WEST and MERCY GENERAL HOSPITAL)

9
10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

ANI CHOPOURIAN,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CATHOLIC HEALTHCARE WEST,)
MERCY GENERAL HOSPITAL, AND )
DOES 1 through 20, inclusive,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________ )

CASE NO. 2:09-CV-02972-KJM-KJN
AMENDED STIPULATION AND ORDER
RELATING TO VIDEO RECORDING OF
DOCUMENT
REVIEW
AND
DEFENDANT’S
MOTION
FOR
PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING THE
VIDEO RECORDING

20
21

The parties, having received the court’s order pertaining to the parties’ Stipulation and

22

Order Relating to Video Recording of Document Review and Defendant’s Motion for Protective

23

Order, which the court issued on July 7, 2011, the parties have further met and conferred regarding

24

the issues addressed in the court’s order, and the parties stipulate and agree as follows:

25

1.

That an independent video company, DB Ronk, will retrieve the sealed box that was

26

delivered to the court on July 1, 2011, which contains plaintiff’s counsel’s video camera.

27

///

28

1
Amended Stipulation and Order Relating to Video Recording of Document Review and Defendant’s Motion for Protective
Order Regarding the Video Recording Case No.: 2:09-CV-02972-KJM-KJN

1

2.

That DB Ronk will, prior to returning the camera to plaintiff’s counsel and without

2

revealing the contents of the video camera to anyone who is not in the direct employ of DB Ronk,

3

copy the contents of the video camera’s files and/or memory to a single readable CD, labeled as

4

“Video Recording of Defendant’s Document Review of June 30, 2011.”

5

3.

6

memory.

7

4.

That DB Ronk will then fully delete the entire contents of the video camera’s

The parties are currently working on a solution for storage of the CD once the

8

contents of the video camera are copied. While the parties make such arrangements, DB Ronk

9

will maintain the CD of the data and/or video files from the plaintiff’s video camera.

10
11
12

5.

Once the contents of the video camera’s memory are downloaded to the CD and

erased, DB Ronk will then deliver the video camera to plaintiff’s counsel.
6.

Should the parties be unable to reach an agreement with regard to storage and

13

retention of the CD during the pendency of this litigation, the parties will file the appropriate

14

motion for protective order and/or request to file under seal in accordance with Local Rule 141.

15

7.

The parties acknowledge that the purpose of the video recording ordered by this

16

Court was to ensure that defendant’s counsel did not tamper with, modify or destroy any of

17

plaintiff’s original documents during the document review.

18

8.

The parties further acknowledge that the video recording may contain the protected

19

work product of defendant’s counsel, and defendant does not waive any right to the protection of

20

such work product.

21

9.

The parties further acknowledge that plaintiff’s counsel has received all original

22

documents that were reviewed by defendant’s counsel, and that said documents were not damaged

23

or tampered with in any manner.

24

10.

Defendant will bear the cost of DB Ronk’s services to retrieve the video camera

25

from the court, copy the contents of the video camera and delete the files therefrom, maintain the

26

CD until such time as an agreement or, if appropriate, court order, for its storage is obtained, and

27

return the video camera to plaintiff’s counsel.

28

2
Amended Stipulation and Order Relating to Video Recording of Document Review and Defendant’s Motion for Protective
Order Regarding the Video Recording Case No.: 2:09-CV-02972-KJM-KJN

1

11.

It is the understanding of the parties that all efforts will be made by DB Ronk to

2

ensure that the return of the video camera to plaintiff’s counsel by the close of business Friday,

3

July 8, 2011, realizing, of course, the necessity of this Court’s approval of this stipulation before

4

the sealed box can be retrieved by DB Ronk.

5

12.

Upon the execution and filing of this stipulation, defendant hereby withdraws its

6

motion for protective order pertaining to the video recording of defendant’s review of plaintiff’s

7

original documents.

8

Dated: July 7, 2011

LA FOLLETTE, JOHNSON,
DE HAAS, FESLER & AMES

9
10
By:___/s/ Mary E. Greene______________
JUDITH CLARK MARTIN
MARY E. “MOLLY” GREENE
Attorneys for Defendant,
CATHOLIC HEALTHCARE WEST
dba MERCY GENERAL HOSPITAL
(erroneously sued and served herein as
CATHOLIC HEALTHCARE WEST
and MERCY GENERAL HOSPITAL)
655 University Avenue, Suite 119
Sacramento, CA 95825
[phone]
[phone] Facsimile
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Dated: July 7, 2011

BOHM LAW GROUP

20
21

By:

22
23
24

/s/ Lawrance A. Bohm
LAWRANCE A. BOHM
4600 Northgate Blvd., Suite 210
Sacramento, CA 95834
Attorney for Plaintiff, ANI CHOPOURIAN
[phone]
[phone] Facsimile
Email: [e-mail]

25
26

///

27

///

28

3
Amended Stipulation and Order Relating to Video Recording of Document Review and Defendant’s Motion for Protective
Order Regarding the Video Recording Case No.: 2:09-CV-02972-KJM-KJN

1

Dated: July 7, 2011

LAW OFFICE OF ERIKA M. GASPAR

2
By:
3
4
5
6

/s/ Erika M. Gaspar
ERIKA M. GASPAR
2121 Natomas Crossing Drive
Suite 200-399
Sacramento, CA 95834
Attorney for Plaintiff, ANI CHOPOURIAN
[phone]
[phone] Facsimile
Email: [e-mail]

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED:

9

Date: July 7, 2011

10
11
12

_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
Amended Stipulation and Order Relating to Video Recording of Document Review and Defendant’s Motion for Protective
Order Regarding the Video Recording Case No.: 2:09-CV-02972-KJM-KJN