Osmena et al v. Lloyds TSB Bank, PLC et al
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Nandor J. Vadas re Confidential Protective Order; terminating 71 Discovery Letter Brief; terminating 74 Discovery Letter Brief (njvlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/9/2013)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID T OSMENA, et al.,
LLOYDS TSB BANK, PLC, et al.,
Case No.:3:12-cv-02937-WHA (NJV)
ORDER RE CONFIDENTIAL
Re: Dkt. Nos. 71 & 74
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Lloyds TSB Bank, PLC (“Lloyds”) has addressed the issues this court raised in its
December 20, 2012 order (Doc. No. 72). See Doc. No. 74. The court orders as follows:
(1) The stipulated protective order may contain the two levels of confidentiality
designations urged by Lloyds.
(2) The term “competitor,” which Lloyds seeks to include in the definition of “expert,”
shall be limited to those competitors Lloyds identified in Exhibit A to Doc. No. 74.
(3) The parties may challenge confidentiality designations. See, e.g., Doc. No. 71-1 at 8,
at ¶ 6. Plaintiffs may use a similar procedure to challenge the entities that Lloyds has identified as
competitors. The court urges the parties to meet and confer in earnest before seeking judicial
intervention regarding these matters.
(4) The parties shall file a revised stipulated protective order reflecting the above within
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 9, 2013
Nandor J. Vadas
United States Magistrate Judge
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?