Synchronoss Technologies, Inc. v. Funambol, Inc.

Filing 101

ORDER by Judge Kandis A. Westmore regarding 95 Stipulated Protective Order. The parties shall adopt the Model Order's language pertaining to judicial intervention and file an amended stipulated protective order within 7 days. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/28/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

SYNCHRONOSS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
Plaintiff,

8
9

v.

10

ORDER REGARDING STIPULATED
PROTECTIVE ORDER

FUNAMBOL INC,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 4:16-cv-02026-HSG (KAW)

12

Re: Dkt. No. 95
Defendant.
On April 7, 2017, the parties filed a stipulated protective order. They did not, however,

13

indicate whether they were using a model protective order or a modified protective order as

14

required by the Court’s Standing Order. (See Judge Westmore’s General Standing Order ¶ 11.)

15

They submitted a supporting declaration on April 21, 2017, but never furnished a chambers copy

16

to the undersigned.

17

Notwithstanding, upon review of the stipulated protective order, the parties again

18

improperly imbedded a discovery dispute, this time pertaining to judicial intervention, in the body

19

of the stipulation. (Dkt. No. 95 at 8-11.) Unlike the previously-filed ESI “stipulation,” in which

20

the Court ordered the parties to meet and confer and submit a joint letter, here, the Court ORDERS

21

the parties to adopt the Model Order’s language pertaining to judicial intervention and file an

22

amended stipulated protective order within 7 days. (See Model Protective Order for Litigation

23

Involving Patents, Highly Sensitive Confidential Information and/or Trade Secrets ¶ 6.3.)

24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 28, 2017
__________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge