General Retirement System of the City of Detroit v. The Wells Fargo Mortgage Backed Securities 2006-AR18 Trust et al

Filing 364

ORDER re Parties' Proposed Form of Protective Order 305 . Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on March 3, 2011. (psglc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/3/2011)

General Retirement System of the City of Detroit v. The Wells Fargo Mor...ties 2006-AR18 Trust et al

Doc. 364

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 On November 19, 2010, the parties filed a proposed form of stipulated protective order. Because some of the provisions of the proposed form of order were not acceptable to the court, the court directed the parties to submit a revised form of protective order that uses the wording of the court's model "Stipulated Protective Order for Litigation Involving Patents, Highly Sensitive Confidential Information And/or Trade Secrets," and to submit a joint brief explaining any modifications rothey seek to that form of order. On December 1, 2010, the parties submitted a Joint Statement re Proposed Modifications to Model Protective Order. Based on the parties' joint statement, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, with a few exceptions discussed herein, the modifications proposed by the parties are acceptable to the court. The proposed modification to the description in Section 2.8 and the addition of Section 2.1 are not acceptable. The protective order should simply set forth the standard without reference to ORDER, page 1
Dockets.Justia.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

IN RE WELLS FARGO MORTGAGE ) BACKED CERTIFICATES LITIGATION ) ) ) ) ) ) ___________________________________ )

Case No.: C 09-1376 LHK (PSG) ORDER RE PARTIES' PROPOSED FORM OF PROTECTIVE ORDER (Re: Docket No. 305)

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

any specific categories of documents. Even though a category of documents may often warrant protection, specific documents with such a category may not be entitled to protection if, for example, they have already been made public. The proposed modification to Section 5.1 is unacceptable as drafted. However, it would be acceptable if the parties include a procedure for the parties to cooperate in dedesignating any nonconfidential portions of specific documents before such documents are submitted to the court for filing so that only the truly confidential portions subject to being filed under seal. The proposed modification to Section 14.1 is unacceptable to the extent it allows the parties to alter the provisions of the protective order without further order of the court. (The parties are always free to waive the protections afforded in a stipulated protective order as to specific documents.) IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall submit a revised form of order that addresses the foregoing concerns. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pending entry of a final form of protective order, the court's model "Stipulated Protective Order for Litigation Involving Patents, Highly Sensitive Confidential Information And/or Trade Secrets," as modified herein, shall govern the handling of confidential information in this case. Dated: March 3, 2011 PAUL S. GREWAL United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER, page 2