McDonald et al v. Toyota Motor Corporation, a Japanese Corporation et al
MINUTE ORDER denying 18 Joint Motion to Enter Stipulated Protective Order. 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. By Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 07/03/13. (alvsl)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya
Civil Action No. 13–cv–00704–RM–KMT
LESLIE MCDONALD, individually and as parent guardian of Kellen McDonald, and
KELLEN MCDONALD, a minor, by and through his parent and guardian Leslie McDonald,
TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION, a Japanese Corporation,
TOYOTA MOTOR SALES U.S.A., INC., a California Corporation, and
DOES 1-30, inclusive,
ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KATHLEEN M. TAFOYA
This matter is before the court on the “Joint Motion to Enter Stipulated Protective Order.” (Doc.
No. 18, filed July 2, 2013.) 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 of Gillard. Therefore, it is ORDERED
that the Motion to Enter Stipulated Protective Order (Doc. No. 18) is DENIED without
prejudice, and the proposed Protective Order is REFUSED.
Dated: July 3, 2013
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?