Marilley v. McCamman et al

Filing 57

PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 12/01/2011. (dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/1/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General of California ROBERT W. BYRNE Supervising Deputy Attorney General CECILIA L. DENNIS, SBN 201997 M. ELAINE MECKENSTOCK, SBN 268861 Deputy Attorneys General 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000 San Francisco, CA 94102-7004 Telephone: (415) 703-5395 Fax: (415) 703-5480 E-mail: Cecilia.Dennis@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for All Defendants 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 OAKLAND DIVISION 11 12 13 14 KEVIN MARILLEY; SALVATORE PAPETTI; SAVIOR PAPETTI, on behalf of themselves and similarly situated, 15 11-CV-2418-DMR Plaintiffs, STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER Judge 16 Trial Date July 30, 2012 Action Filed: May 18, 2011 17 18 19 20 21 The Honorable Donna M. Ryu v. CHARLTON H. BONHAM, in his official capacity; JIM KELLOGG, in his official capacity; MICHAEL SUTTON, in his official capacity; DANIEL W. RICHARDS, in his official capacity; and JACK BAYLIS, in his official capacity; Defendants. 22 23 WHEREAS, on October 15, 2011, Plaintiff Kevin Marilley propounded his first set of 24 requests for production of documents on Defendant Director of the Department of Fish and Game 25 (“DFG Director”), in his official capacity; 26 27 28 WHEREAS, to the extent Plaintiff seeks documents identifying persons who have paid a nonresident fee in connection with the purchase or renewal of one or more of four California 1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER (11-CV-2418) 1 2 3 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 commercial fishing licenses, permits, or registrations, these identifying documents are confidential documents under California Fish and Game Code section 8022(a); WHEREAS, Fish and Game Code section 8022(b) provides that “the department may release the confidential information . . . pursuant to a court order[.]”; WHEREAS, Plaintiffs assert that they need the identifying information described above to prepare their class certification motion due January 5, 2012, and potentially for other purposes going to the merits; WHEREAS, DFG Director does not oppose a Court order allowing him to release the confidential documents in compliance with Fish and Game Code section 8022(b), pursuant to and within the scope of a proper discovery request in this case. ACCORDINGLY, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Pursuant to and within the scope of a proper discovery request in this case, DFG Director is authorized to release any document designated as confidential under Fish and Game Code section 8022(a). 2. To the extent DFG Director produces documents containing identifying information, including names and contact information, for nonresident fishermen, Plaintiffs agree to keep the information confidential. 3. Plaintiffs agree not to use the information deemed confidential to contact anyone identified in these documents unless and until (a) the Court certifies a class in this matter, or (b) the Court modifies this order. 4. Nothing in this stipulation and [proposed] order shall prevent or limit Plaintiffs from communicating with persons whose contact information Plaintiffs independently possess or acquire. 5. Nothing in this stipulation and [proposed] order shall prevent Defendants from objecting to, or otherwise opposing, any discovery request by Plaintiffs. 6. Nothing in this stipulation and [proposed] order shall be deemed to constitute any agreement, admission, or consent by Plaintiffs concerning the propriety or legal basis of the 2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER (11-CV-2418) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 limitations described in Paragraph 3, and Defendants shall be barred from introducing the fact that counsel for Plaintiffs executed this stipulation and [proposed] order in support of any argument concerning the propriety or legal basis of the limitations described in Paragraph 3, including but not limited to any motion by Plaintiffs for sanctions. 7. Plaintiffs further agree not to duplicate any information deemed confidential except to the extent necessary to utilize the confidential documents for the purposes for which they are being released. 8. Plaintiffs further agree to destroy the original and any duplicates of any confidential information within 60 days of the Court’s denial of class certification or, if the class is certified, within 60 days of a final determination of this case, including any appeals. 9. Plaintiffs’ counsel certifies that procedures are in place at his firm, office or other places where he conduct business, as well as at his residence if he takes the data home in any form, to prevent unauthorized disclosure of the confidential information. 10. If any confidential identifying information subject to this protective order is lost, stolen, or misplaced while in the custody of Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs shall notify DFG Director in writing of any such occurrences. 17 18 19 KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General of California ROBERT W. BYRNE Supervising Deputy Attorney General Dated: November 30, 2011 20 21 22 23 /s/ Cecilia L. Dennis CECILIA L. DENNIS Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for All Defendants 24 25 26 27 28 3 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER (11-CV-2418) 1 Dated: November 29, 2011 GROSS LAW 2 3 Original Signed by S. Gross ______________________________ Stuart G. Gross (SBN 251019) sgross@gross-law.com The Embarcadero, Pier 9, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 671-4628 Facsimile: (415) 480-6688 4 5 6 7 8 Counsel for Plaintiffs and Proposed Class 9 UNIT ED S PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED, 11 ER 16 A H 15 M. Ryu LI RT SF2011201820 onna Judge D FO MAGISTRATE JUDGE DONNA RYU NO 14 December 1, 2011 R NIA D RDERE S SO O _________________________________ IT I 12 13 RT U O 10 S DISTRICT TE C TA N F D IS T IC T O R C 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER (11-CV-2418)

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?