Cravotta v. County of Sacramento et al

Filing 18

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 8/2/2022 GRANTING 16 Stipulated Protective Order.(Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Mark E. Merin (State Bar No. 043849)
Paul H. Masuhara (State Bar No. 289805)

LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN
1010 F Street, Suite 300
Sacramento, California 95814
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
E-Mail:
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ANTHONY CRAVOTTA II
RIVERA HEWITT PAUL LLP
11341 Gold Express Drive, Suite 160
Gold River, CA 95670
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Jonathan B. Paul, SBN 215884
[e-mail]
Jill B. Nathan, SBN 186136
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO
COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,
and SCOTT JONES

16
17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

18

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

19

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

20

ANTHONY CRAVOTTA II,
Plaintiff,

21
22

vs.

23

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO
COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,
SCOTT JONES, and DOE 1 to 20,

24
25

Case No. 2:22-cv-00167-TLN-AC
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER
RE: PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION;
[PROPOSED] ORDER

Defendants.

26
27
28
1
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION
Cravotta v. County of Sacramento, United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:22-cv-00167-TLN-AC

1
2
3
4

STIPULATION
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c), E.D. Cal. L.R. 141.1, and 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(e)(1)(v), the
parties stipulate to the entry of a qualified protective order as follows:
1.

The parties and their attorneys are authorized to receive, subpoena, and transmit

5

“protected health information” pertaining to Anthony Cravotta II, Lemar Burleson, and third-parties or

6

non-parties to this action, including but not limited to that which is contained in the records of the County

7

of Sacramento, Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department, Regents of the University of California d/b/a

8

U.C. Davis Health a/k/a Jail Psychiatric Services (“JPS”), and/or California Department of State

9

Hospitals (“DSH”), to the extent and subject to the conditions outlined herein.

10

2.

For the purposes of this qualified protective order, “protected health information” shall

11

have the same scope and definition as set forth in 45 C.F.R. § 160.103 and 164.501. Protected health

12

information includes, but is not limited to, health information, including demographic information,

13

relating to either: (a) the past, present, or future physical or mental condition of an individual; (b) the

14

provision of care to an individual; or (c) the payment for care provided to an individual, which identifies

15

the individual or which reasonably could be expected to identify the individual.

16

3.

All “covered entities” (as defined by 45 C.F.R. § 160.103) are hereby authorized to

17

disclose protected health information to attorneys representing Plaintiff and Defendants in the above-

18

captioned litigation.

19

4.

The parties and their attorneys shall be permitted to use or disclose the protected health

20

information for purposes of prosecuting or defending this action including any appeals of this case. This

21

includes, but is not necessarily limited to, disclosure to their attorneys, experts, consultants, court

22

personnel, court reporters, copy services, trial consultants, and other entities or persons involved in the

23

litigation process. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit counsel in this matter from

24

sharing information as permitted by law.

25

5.

Prior to disclosing protected health information to persons involved in this litigation,

26

counsel shall inform each such person that the protected health information may not be used or disclosed

27

for any purpose other than this litigation. Counsel shall take all other reasonable steps to ensure that

28

persons receiving the protected health information do not use or disclose such information for any
2
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION
Cravotta v. County of Sacramento, United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:22-cv-00167-TLN-AC

1
2

purpose other than this litigation.
6.

Within 45 days after the conclusion of the litigation including appeals, the parties, their

3

attorneys, and any person or entity in possession of protected health information received from counsel

4

pursuant to paragraph four of this Order, shall return the protected health information to the covered

5

entity or destroy any and all copies of protected health information, except that counsel are not required

6

to secure the return or destruction of protected health information submitted to the court.

7

7.

This Order does not authorize either party to seal court filings or court proceedings. A

8

party may seek permission from the Court to file protected health information under seal pursuant to E.D.

9

Cal. L.R. 141.

10
11

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: July 29, 2022

Respectfully Submitted,

LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN

12

/s/ Mark E. Merin

13

By: __________________________________
Mark E. Merin
Paul H. Masuhara

14
15

Attorneys for Plaintiff
ANTHONY CRAVOTTA II

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

Dated: July 29, 2022

Respectfully Submitted,
RIVERA HEWITT PAUL LLP
/s/ Jill B. Nathan
(as authorized on July 29, 2022)
By: __________________________________
Jonathan B. Paul
Jill B. Nathan
Attorneys for Defendants
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO
COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,
and SCOTT JONES

23
24
25
26
27
28
3

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION
Cravotta v. County of Sacramento, United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:22-cv-00167-TLN-AC

1

[PROPOSED] ORDER

2

The parties’ stipulation is GRANTED.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4

Dated: August 2, 2022

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION
Cravotta v. County of Sacramento, United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:22-cv-00167-TLN-AC