Cuevas v. ConAm Management Corporation et al

Filing 21

ORDER Granting Joint 20 Motion for Protective Order With Modifications. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 12/17/18. (dlg)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Case No.: 18cv1189-GPC (LL)

ELIZABETH CUEVAS, as an individual
and on behalf of all others similarly
situated,

ORDER GRANTING JOINT
MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE
ORDER WITH MODIFICATIONS

Plaintiff,
CONAM MANAGEMENT
CORPORATION; and
DOES 1 THROUGH 10,

[ECF No. 20]
Defendant.

17
18
19

On December 7, 2018, the parties filed a joint motion asking the Court to enter their

20

stipulated Protective Order. ECF No. 20. In one of the provisions, the parties requested a

21

an exception to the Civil Chambers Rules for the undersigned magistrate judge, to allow

22

(1) additional time to file any motions related to discovery disputes and (2) to designate

23

the date giving rise to a dispute concerning confidential designation as the date of receipt—

24

as opposed to the date of service—of the document in question by the receiving Party. Id.

25

at 2, 6-7. In support, the parties state that allowing the parties sixty days to file discovery

26

disputes, as opposed to thirty days, would allow the parties to work out issues themselves

27

and decrease the need to involve the Court. Id. at 2; see also Judge Lopez Civil Chambers

28

///
1
(LL)

1

Rules, Section V.C.1 The Court denies the parties’ request for a blanket exception to its

2

chambers rules for the timely filing of discovery motions.2 Accordingly, for good cause

3

shown, the joint motion for entry of a Protective Order is GRANTED with the following

4

modifications:

5

1.

Paragraph 5(d) should read: “Consistent with Rule V(C) of the Chambers

6

Rules, any motion related to discovery disputes must be filed no later than thirty (30) days

7

after the date upon which the event giving rise to the dispute occurred. The date giving

8

rise to a dispute concerning a confidential designation under this Protective Order shall be

9

the date of service of the document in question.”

10

2.

Paragraph 7(b) should read: “In the event a party wishes to file a document

11

or other materials designated as ‘Confidential’ with the court in the Litigation, that party

12

shall file a motion seeking to file the document under seal. No document may be filed

13

under seal (i.e., closed to inspection by the public) except pursuant to a court order that

14

authorizes the sealing of the particular document, or portions of it. A sealing order may

15

issue only upon a showing that the information is privileged or protectable under the law.

16

The request must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of the confidential or privileged

17

material. To file a document under seal, the parties must comply with the procedures

18

explained in Section 2.j of the Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and

19

Procedures Manual for the United States District Court for the Southern District of

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The relevant rule states the following:
Discovery motions must be timely. Any motion related to discovery disputes must be
filed no later than thirty (30) days after the date upon which the event giving rise to the
dispute occurred. For oral discovery, the event giving rise to the dispute is the completion
of the transcript of the relevant portion of the deposition. For written discovery, the event
giving rise to the discovery dispute is the date of service of the response, or the passage of
a discovery due date without response or production, not the date on which counsel reach
an impasse in meet and confer efforts.
Judge Lopez Civil Chambers Rules, Section V.C.
2
It is unclear if the parties requested the additional time to apply only to discovery disputes challenging a
confidentiality designation or to all discovery disputes. However, this does not affect the instant order
because the Court is not inclined to allow a blanket exception to its chambers rules for either request.
2
(LL)

1

California (hereinafter ‘Manual’), Civil Local Rule 79.2, and Chambers Rules. The

2

Manual

3

https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/CMECF/SitePages/PoliciesAndProcedures.aspx.

4

addition, in accordance with Judge Lopez’s preferences, a party must file a ‘public’ version

5

of any document that it seeks to file under seal. In the public version, the party may redact

6

only that information that is deemed ‘Confidential.’ The party shall file the redacted

7

document(s) simultaneously with a joint motion or ex parte application requesting that the

8

confidential portions of the document(s) be filed under seal and setting forth good cause

9

for the request.”

10
11

can

be

found

here:
In

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 17, 2018

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
(LL)