Continental D.I.A. Diamond Products, Inc. v. Dong Young Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd. et al

Filing 68

ORDER RE: PROTECTIVE ORDER (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/26/2008)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CONTINENTAL D.I.A. DIAMOND PRODUCTS, INC., Plaintiff, v. DONG YOUNG DIAMOND INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD., DONGSOO LEE, and DOES 1-10, inclusive. Defendants. / No. C 08-02136 SI ORDER RE: PROTECTIVE ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff has submitted a proposed protective order. [Docket No. 61] Defendants accept the terms of plaintiff's proposed order with two caveats: 1. Para. 2.12: Defendants request that the sentence reading "Such Foreign Counsel may only use a Disclosing Party's Materials, however designated, for this litigation" be deleted. Para. 7.1: Defendants request that the sentence "A Receiving Party may use Protected Material that is disclosed or produced by another Party or by a non-party in connection with this case only for prosecuting, defending, or attempting to settle this litigation" be revised to add, "or other proceedings arising out of the same nucleus of operative facts." 2. Plaintiff's proposed language for 7.1 comports with the standard protective order provided as a model for litigants in the Northern District; plaintiff's proposed language 2.12 is an addition to the standard form. Defendants' proposed changes to the protective order relate to their contention that they should not be precluded from using documents produced under a protective order in this case in other litigation. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(G) provides that courts may enter a protective order "requiring that a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 not be revealed or be revealed only in a specified way." In this case, plaintiff requests that "only a small amount" of discoverable information, such as sales figures, profit margins, customer preferences, and proprietary product specifications be placed under the protective order. See Pl. Letter Brief, at 3. The Court finds that this information is qualifies as confidential commercial information for the purposes of Rule 26(c)(G). The Court will not be able to ensure that the terms of the protective order are observed if defendants use this information in other litigation in a forum outside this Court's jurisdiction. In addition, defendants provide no justification for deviating from the practice of the Northern District and reserving the right to use confidential documents produced in this matter in other litigation. Accordingly, the Court finds that defendants' changes to the proposed stipulation are not warranted. The Court will enter the protective order offered by plaintiffs without amendment. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 11/26/08 SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge 2

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?