Dao v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston

Filing 154

ORDER for In Camera Review by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte. (shyS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/14/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 HONG-NGOC T DAO, Plaintiff, United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 Case No. 14-cv-04749-SI (EDL) ORDER FOR IN CAMERA REVIEW v. Re: Dkt. No. 151 LIBERTY LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF BOSTON, Defendant. 15 16 This is a lawsuit regarding the denial of benefits under a long term disability policy issued 17 to Plaintiff Hong-Ngoc Dao by Defendant Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston. The case 18 has been referred to this Court for discovery, and on July 30, 2015, this Court granted in part 19 Plaintiff’s motion to quash or modify subpoenas and for a protective order in which the Court 20 ordered Plaintiff to produce psychotherapy notes but allowed for redactions. On March 10, 2016, 21 the parties filed a joint letter in which they dispute whether the Court’s prior Order limited 22 permissible redactions to Plaintiff’s own personal traumatic experiences, or whether redactions 23 relating to third parties could also be appropriate. The parties jointly request that the Court review 24 in camera the psychotherapy records that Plaintiff previously produced in redacted form to 25 determine whether Plaintiff’s redactions are appropriate or overbroad. 26 The Court’s prior Order was not intended to strictly limit redactions to Plaintiff’s own 27 personal trauma, and limited redaction of private information relating to third parties may also be 28 appropriate. The Court will review in camera the documents Bates numbered 304, 313, 316, 317, 1 375, 384, 390, 393, 394, 396, 402, 406, 407, 412, and 419 that, according to the log attached to the 2 joint letter, were redacted to remove information relating to third parties. Within one week of the 3 date of this Order, Plaintiff shall lodge directly with chambers both a redacted and unredacted 4 copy of these documents. The parties do not appear to dispute that redactions of the other 5 documents listed on the log are appropriate so the Court need not consider these documents in 6 camera. 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 14, 2016 9 10 ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE United States Magistrate Judge United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?