Home Design Services, Inc. v. Pace Enterprises, Inc. et al
Filing
62
MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 60 Stipulated Motion for Protective Order and the proposed Protective Order is refused by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 6/7/12.(sgrim)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya
Civil Action No. 11–cv–00489–REB–KMT
HOME DESIGN SERVICES, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
PACE ENTERPRISES, INC., and
VERNON O. PACE,
Defendants.
MINUTE ORDER
ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KATHLEEN M. TAFOYA
This matter is before the court on the parties’ “Stipulated Motion for Protective Order” (Doc.
No. 60, filed June 7, 2012). The Motion is DENIED and the proposed Protective Order is
REFUSED. The parties are granted leave to submit a motion for protective order and revised
form of protective order consistent with the comments contained here.
Gillard v. Boulder Valley School District, 196 F.R.D. 382 (D. Colo. 2000), set out certain
requirements for the issuance of a blanket protective order such as the one sought here. Among
other things, any information designated by a party as confidential must first be reviewed by a
lawyer who will certify that the designation as confidential is “based on a good faith belief that
[the information] is confidential or otherwise entitled to protection.” Id. at 386. The proposed
Protective Order does not comply with this requirement established in Gillard.
Therefore, it is ORDERED that the Motion for Protective Order (Doc. No. 60) is DENIED
without prejudice.
Dated: June 7, 2012
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?