Quantum Corporation v. Crossroads Systems, Inc.
Filing
64
ORDER APPROVING STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER AND E-DISCOVERY STIPULATION SUBJECT TO STATED CONDITIONS by Judge Alsup re 62 Stipulation; 63 Stipulation (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/20/2015)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
12
13
No. C 14-04293 WHA
QUANTUM CORPORATION,
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
Plaintiff,
v.
CROSSROADS SYSTEMS, INC,
14
Defendant.
/
ORDER APPROVING
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE
ORDER AND E-DISCOVERY
STIPULATION SUBJECT TO
STATED CONDITIONS
15
16
The stipulated protective order and stipulation re discovery of electronically stored
17
information (Dkt. Nos. 62, 63) are hereby APPROVED, subject to the following conditions,
18
including adherence to the Ninth Circuit’s strict caution against sealing orders (as set out
19
below):
20
1.
The parties must make a good-faith determination that any
21
information designated “confidential” truly warrants protection under Rule 26(c)
22
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Designations of material as
23
“confidential” must be narrowly tailored to include only material for which there
24
is good cause. A pattern of over-designation may lead to an order un-designating
25
all or most materials on a wholesale basis.
26
2.
In order to be treated as confidential, any materials filed with the
27
Court must be lodged with a request for filing under seal in compliance with Civil
28
Local Rule 79-5. Please limit your requests for sealing to only those narrowly
tailored portions of materials for which good cause to seal exists. Please include
1
all other portions of your materials in the public file and clearly indicate therein
2
where material has been redacted and sealed. Each filing requires an
3
individualized sealing order; blanket prospective authorizations are no longer
4
allowed by Civil Local Rule 79-5.
5
3.
Chambers copies should include all material — both redacted and
or declaration. Chambers copies more than two-inches thick shall include exhibit
8
tabs. Although chambers copies should clearly designate which portions are
9
confidential, chambers copies with confidential materials will be handled like all
10
other chambers copies of materials without special restriction, and will typically
11
For the Northern District of California
unredacted — so that chambers staff does not have to reassemble the whole brief
7
United States District Court
6
be recycled, not shredded.
12
4.
In Kamakana v. Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006),
13
the Ninth Circuit held that more than good cause, indeed, “compelling reasons”
14
are required to seal documents used in dispositive motions, just as compelling
15
reasons would be needed to justify a closure of a courtroom during trial.
16
Otherwise, the Ninth Circuit held, public access to the work of the courts will be
17
unduly compromised. Therefore, no request for a sealing order will be allowed
18
on summary judgment motions (or other dispositive motions) unless the movant
19
first shows a “compelling reason,” a substantially higher standard than “good
20
cause.” This will be true regardless of any stipulation by the parties. Counsel are
21
warned that most summary judgment motions and supporting material should be
22
completely open to public view. Only social security numbers, names of
23
juveniles, home addresses and phone numbers, and trade secrets of a compelling
24
nature (like the recipe for Coca Cola, for example) will qualify. If the courtroom
25
would not be closed for the information, nor should any summary judgment
26
proceedings, which are, in effect, a substitute for trial. Motions in limine are also
27
part of the trial and must likewise be laid bare absent compelling reasons. Please
28
2
1
comply fully. Noncompliant submissions are liable to be stricken in
2
their entirety.
3
4
5
5.
Any confidential materials used openly in court hearings or trial
will not be treated in any special manner absent a further order.
6.
This order does not preclude any party from moving to
6
undesignate information or documents that have been designated as confidential.
7
The party seeking to designate material as confidential has the burden of
8
establishing that the material is entitled to protection.
9
7.
The Court will retain jurisdiction over disputes arising from the
proposed and stipulated protective order for only NINETY DAYS after final
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
termination of the action.
12
13
IT IS SO ORDERED.
14
15
16
Dated: March 20, 2015.
WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?