Chapple v. County of Sacramento et al

Filing 27

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Chi Soo Kim on 3/10/2025. (Deputy Clerk LMS)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MARQUISE CHAPPLE,

Case No. 2:24-cv-01939-TLN-CSK

12

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED
PROTECTIVE ORDER

13
14
15

v.
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.,

(ECF No. 24)

Defendants.

16
17

The Court has reviewed the parties’ stipulated protective order below (ECF No. 24), and

18

finds it comports with the relevant authorities and the Court’s Local Rule. See L.R. 141.1. The

19

Court APPROVES the protective order, subject to the following clarification.

20

The Court’s Local Rules indicate that once an action is closed, it “will not retain

21

jurisdiction over enforcement of the terms of any protective order filed in that action.” L.R.

22

141.1(f); see Bylin Heating Sys., Inc. v. Thermal Techs., Inc., 2012 WL 13237584, at *2 (E.D.

23

Cal. Oct. 29, 2012) (noting that courts in the district generally do not retain jurisdiction for

24

disputes concerning protective orders after closure of the case). Thus, the Court will not retain

25
26
27
28

jurisdiction over this protective order once the case is closed.
Dated: March 10, 2025

4, chapp1939.24

1
[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PERSONNEL FILES
4891-6966-7285, v. 1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Carl L. Fessenden, SBN 161494
[e-mail]
Cruz Rocha, SBN 279293
[e-mail]
2180 Harvard Street, Suite 500
Sacramento, California 95815
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

Attorney for Defendants
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO COUNT SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, JIM
COOPER, and NATHANIEL DAVIS
Exempt from Filing Fees Pursuant to Government Code § 6103

10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13

MARQUISE CHAPPLE,

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE
ORDER RE: PERSONNEL FILES

Plaintiff,
v.
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO,
SACRAMENTO SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT, JIM COOPER, and
NATHANIEL DAVIS,

Complaint Filed: 7/16/2024

Defendants.
___________________________________/
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

22
23

CASE NO. 2:24-cv-1939-TLN-CSK

A.

PURPOSE AND LIMITATION

24

Defendants believe that the disclosure and discovery activity concerning the materials described

25

in this stipulated protective order is likely to involve production of information for which protection from

26

public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation would be warranted.

27

Plaintiff has not been permitted to view the materials described in this stipulated protective order. The

28

parties acknowledge that this protective order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or
2
[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PERSONNEL FILES
4891-6966-7285, v. 1

1

discovery activity, and that the protection it affords extends only to the limited information or items that

2

are entitled to such protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). The parties further

3

acknowledge that this stipulated protective order does not entitle any party to file information designated

4

as protected or confidential under seal, where Local Rule 141 sets forth the procedures that must be

5

followed and reflects the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the Court to

6

file material under seal.

7

B.

DEFINITIONS

8

The following definitions shall apply to this Protective Order:

9

1.

The “Action” shall mean and refer to the above-captioned matter and to all actions now or

10

later consolidated with the Action, and any appeal from the Action and from any other action consolidated

11

at any time under the above-captioned matter, through final judgment.

12
13

2.

“Documents” or “Confidential Documents” shall mean the documents that Defendants

designate as “Confidential” and described in section C.

14

3.

“Confidential” shall mean information designated “Confidential” pursuant to this

15

stipulated protective order. Information designated “Confidential” shall be information that is determined

16

in good faith by the attorneys representing the designating party to be subject to protection pursuant to

17

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). Confidential documents, material, and/or information shall be used

18

solely for purposes of litigation. Confidential information shall not be used by the non-designating party

19

for any business or other purpose, unless agreed to in writing by all parties to this action or as authorized

20

by further order of the Court.

21
22

4.

“Defendants” shall mean COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO SHERIFF’S

DEPARTMENT, JIM COOPER, and NATHANIEL DAVIS.

23

5.

“Plaintiff” shall mean MARQUISE CHAPPLE.

24

6.

“Parties” shall mean Plaintiff and Defendants, identified above.

25

C.

INFORMATION COVERED

26

Covered Information:

27

Pursuant to Local Rule 141.1(c)(1), a description of the information eligible for protection under

28

this stipulated protective order is limited to the following:
3
[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PERSONNEL FILES
4891-6966-7285, v. 1

1
2

1.

Personnel files of Defendant NATHANIEL DAVIS, including any documents related to

investigation of conduct, complaints or investigations or complaints, and imposition of discipline.

3

2.

4

Particularized Need for Protection:

5

Pursuant to Local Rule 141.1(c)(2), Defendants assert that there exists a specific, particularized

6

need for protection as to the information covered by this stipulated protective order. Defendants represent

7

to the Court and Plaintiff that the materials designated to be covered by this stipulated protective order are

8

limited solely to those which would qualify for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c),

9

and does not include information designated on a blanket or indiscriminate basis. See, e.g., In Re Roman

10

Catholic Archbishop of Portland, 661 F.3d 417, 424 (9th Cir. 2011).

The declaration of Defendant NATHANIEL DAVIS declaring his financial net worth.

11

Showing of Need for a Protective Order:

12

Pursuant to Local Rule 141.1(c)(3), protection afforded by this stipulated protective order is for

13

the convenience of Defendants and the Court. Defendants seek to avoid litigation and expenditure of

14

resources concerning a potential motion for protective order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

15

26(c). The entry of this stipulated protective order may prevent the parties and the Court from conducting

16

the usual document-by-document analysis necessary to obtain protection, in favor of a procedure whereby

17

presumptive protection is afforded based on Defendants’ good faith representations of the need for

18

protection. See, e.g., Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., 785 F.2d 1108, 1122 (3d Cir. 1986). As a result,

19

production may be made with this stipulated protective order in place and, if necessary, it will permit

20

discrete and narrowed challenges to documents designated for protection.

21

D.

22
23
24

TERMS OF THE PROTECTIVE ORDER
Confidential Documents subject to protection may be designated as “Confidential” and produced

subject to this stipulated protective order:
1.

The Confidential documents shall be used solely in connection with the above-captioned

25

civil case, and in the preparation and trial of the case. The terms of this stipulated protective order do not

26

apply to documents produced by Defendants in other cases or matters. The parties do not waive any

27

objections to the admissibility of the documents or portions thereof in future proceedings in this case,

28

including trial.
4
[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PERSONNEL FILES
4891-6966-7285, v. 1

1
2
3

2.

labelling them “Confidential.”
3.

4
5

The parties will designate the Confidential documents as confidential by affixing a mark
The Confidential documents may only be disclosed to the following persons:
a.

Plaintiff and Mark E. Merin and Paul H. Masuhara of the Law Office of Mark E.

Merin, and any partners and associates in that office;

6

b.

Defendants and Carl L. Fessenden and Cruz Rocha of Porter Scott, and any partners

7

and associates in that office;

8

c.

Paralegal, clerical, and secretarial personnel or support staff regularly employed by

9

counsel referred to in subparts (a) and (b) immediately above, including stenographic deposition reporters

10

or videographers retained in connection with this action;

11
12

d.

proceedings as are necessarily incidental to the preparation for the trial in the civil action;

13
14

e.

Any expert, consultant, or investigator retained in connection with this action;

however, such persons must be advised of and abide by this protective order;

15
16

Court personnel, including stenographic reporters or videographers engaged in

f.

The finder of facts at the time of trial, subject to the court’s rulings on in limine

motions and objections of counsel; and

17

g.

Witnesses during their depositions in this action. If confidential documents are used

18

in the deposition, the documents must be identified as “Confidential” and the portion of the deposition in

19

which the documents are described should also be considered confidential.

20

4.

Information covered by this stipulated protective order does not automatically entitle the

21

parties to file such information or documents with the Court under seal. Any request to seal documents is

22

governed by Local Rule 141. If the Confidential documents are filed with any motion or other pleading, a

23

party may seek permission from the Court to file the Confidential Documents under seal according to

24

Local Rule 141. If permission is granted, the Confidential documents will be filed and served in

25

accordance with Local Rule 141.

26

5.

The designation of the Confidential documents as “Confidential” and the subsequent

27

production thereof is without prejudice to the right of any party to oppose the admissibility of the

28

Confidential documents or information contained therein.
5
[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PERSONNEL FILES
4891-6966-7285, v. 1

1

6.

Any party or non-party may challenge a Confidential designation at any time. A party or

2

non-party does not waive its right to challenge a confidentiality designation by electing not to mount a

3

challenge promptly after the original designation is disclosed. The challenging party shall initiate the

4

dispute resolution process by providing written notice of each designation it is challenging and describing

5

the basis for each challenge. The parties shall attempt to resolve each challenge in good faith and must

6

begin the process by conferring directly (in person or voice-to-voice dialogue; other forms of

7

communication are not sufficient) within seven (7) days of the date of service of notice. In conferring, the

8

challenging party must explain the basis for its belief that the confidentiality designation was not proper

9

and must give the designating party an opportunity to review the designated material, to reconsider the

10

circumstances, and, if no change in designation is offered, to explain the basis for the chosen designation.

11

A challenging party may proceed to the next stage of the challenge process only if it has engaged in this

12

meet and confer process first or establishes that the designating party is unwilling to participate in the

13

meet and confer process in a timely manner. If the parties cannot resolve a challenge without Court

14

intervention, the designating party shall file and serve a motion for protective order/to retain

15

confidentiality pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) and Local Rule 251 within twenty-one (21)

16

days of the initial notice of challenge or within seven (7) days of the parties agreeing that the meet and

17

confer process will not resolve their dispute, whichever is earlier. Failure by the designating party to make

18

such a motion within twenty-one (21) days (or seven (7) days, if applicable) shall automatically waive the

19

“Confidential” designation for each challenged designation. In addition, the challenging party may file a

20

motion challenging a confidentiality designation at any time if there is good cause for doing so. The burden

21

of persuasion in any such challenge proceeding shall be on the designating party, consistent with Federal

22

Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). Unless the designating party has waived the confidentiality designation by

23

failing to file a motion for protective order/to retain confidentiality as described above, all parties shall

24

continue to afford the material in question the level of protection to which it is entitled under the

25

designating party’s designation until the Court rules on the challenge.

26

7.

Should the Confidential documents or any information contained therein be disclosed,

27

through inadvertence or otherwise, to any person not authorized to receive it under this stipulated

28

protective order, the disclosing person(s) shall promptly (a) inform counsel for the Defendants of the
6
[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PERSONNEL FILES
4891-6966-7285, v. 1

1

recipient(s) and the circumstances of the unauthorized disclosure to the relevant producing person(s) and

2

(b) use best efforts to bind the recipient(s) to the terms of this stipulated protective order.

3

8.

The Confidential documents shall not lose its confidential status because it was

4

inadvertently or unintentionally disclosed to a person not authorized to receive it under this stipulated

5

protective order.

6

9.

The protections conferred by this stipulated protective order cover the information defined

7

above, as well as any information copied from the materials. However, the protections conferred by this

8

stipulated protective order do not cover: (A) any information that is in the public domain at the time of

9

disclosure or which subsequently becomes part of the public domain after its disclosure, including

10

becoming part of the public record through trial or otherwise; and (B) any information known prior to the

11

disclosure or obtained after the disclosure from a source who obtained the information lawfully and under

12

no obligation of confidentiality.

13

10.

All Confidential documents covered by this Order will continue to be confidential if it

14

remains the proper subject of a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(c), including

15

after this litigation concludes. However, if the documents subject to this stipulated protective order are

16

used or produced in another proceeding in which Defendant NATHANIEL DAVIS is a named defendant

17

or involves the officer-involved shooting of Plaintiff MARQUISE CHAPPLE, this stipulated protective

18

order shall not apply in that matter. Nothing in this stipulated protective order shall be construed as a

19

waiver of any claim of confidentiality or the right of the Defendants to assert the documents in the other

20

matter are subject to this stipulated protective order. Notwithstanding, as to any documents produced in

21

this case under this stipulated protective order, within 90 days after this litigation concludes by settlement,

22

final judgment, or final order, including all appeals, all documents designated as containing Confidential

23

Information, including copies as defined above, must be returned to the party who previously produced

24

the document unless: (1) the document has been offered into evidence or filed without restriction as to

25

disclosure; (2) the document is destroyed to the extent practicable in lieu of return; or (3) as to documents

26

bearing the notations, summations, or other mental impressions of the receiving party, that party elects to

27

destroy the documents and certifies to the producing party that it has done so. All confidential documents

28

or information that is subject to this protective order shall be returned or destroyed upon the conclusion
7
[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PERSONNEL FILES
4891-6966-7285, v. 1

1

of this litigation, either through the settlement of the case, the dismissal of the case or the entry of a Final

2

Order (i.e., an Order not subject to further appeal). Nothing in this section requires a party, its counsel, or

3

consultants to delete discovery material which may reside on one or more backup tapes or other media

4

maintained for purposes of disaster recovery, business continuity, or other reasons, except that the parties

5

agree that all such Confidential documents will continue to be confidential under this Order.

6

11.

After the conclusion of this litigation, the Confidential documents will remain confidential.

7

“Conclusion” of this litigation means a termination of the case following a trial, settlement, or dismissal

8

of the action with prejudice for any other reason.

9

12.

This stipulated protective order shall remain in full force and effect and shall continue to

10

be binding on all parties and affected persons until this litigation terminates, subject to any subsequent

11

modifications of this stipulated protective order for good cause shown by this Court or any Court having

12

jurisdiction over an appeal of this action. Upon termination of this litigation, the parties agree the stipulated

13

protective order shall continue in force as a private agreement between the parties.

14

13.

The parties may request additional records to be subject to this stipulated protective order.

15

If a party believes a document to be produced should be subject to this stipulated protective order, the

16

parties must meet and confer. If there is agreement, the parties shall submit an amendment to this stipulated

17

protective order to identify the additional documents. If the parties cannot agree, the party seeking

18

protection shall file a motion for protective order pursuant to the terms of Local Rule 251.

19

14.

During the pendency of this lawsuit, the Court may (a) make such amendments,

20

modifications, and/or additions to this stipulated protective order as deemed appropriate upon good cause

21

shown; and (b) adjudicate any dispute arising under it.

22
23

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: March 6, 2025

PORTER SCOTT

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

24

By /s/Cruz Rocha__________________
Carl L. Fessenden
Cruz Rocha
Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF
SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO
COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT,
JIM COOPER, and NATHANIEL DAVIS

25
26
27
28
8

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PERSONNEL FILES
4891-6966-7285, v. 1

1
2

Dated: March 6, 2025

LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN

3

By /s/Mark E. Merin (Authorized on 3/6/25)
Mark E. Merin
Paul H. Masuhara
Attorneys for Plaintiff
MARQUISE CHAPPLE

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
9

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PERSONNEL FILES
4891-6966-7285, v. 1