Vasquez v. Lewis et al

Filing 10

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER. The court finds good cause to enter the stipulated protective order submitted by the parties, with modification to paragraph III.K. Signed by Magistrate Judge James P. O'Hara on 5/14/2012. (ah)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
PETER L. VASQUEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
DAX K. LEWIS and
UNKNOWN JOHN DOE
KANSAS HIGHWAY PATROL
TROOPERS,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 12-4021-CM-JPO

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER FOR
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) and in accordance with the Scheduling Order entered
herein and the Guidelines for Agreed Protective Orders of this Court, the Parties have jointly
requested a Protective Order because they may seek to discover and/or produce information,
documents and things including, but not limited to, medical and psychiatric records, personnel
files of Parties and non-parties, criminal investigation records, internal policies and procedures of
law enforcement agencies, and other matters of a similar nature considered to be confidential.
More specifically, in this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiff, an Iraqi War Veteran,
seeks minor economic damages in the form of scratches to his vehicle’s exterior and $10,000 in
non-economic damages for humiliation, embarrassment, and emotional distress (including fear
and anxiety); the Complaint also refers to Plaintiff’s health conditions; hence, records related to
these issues may be requested and produced. Defendant Dax K. Lewis is a Trooper of the Kansas
Highway Patrol, a law enforcement agency of the State of Kansas, subject to state and federal
law regarding disclosure of criminal investigation records and criminal history. Policies and
procedures of the Kansas Highway Patrol, and possibly internal investigation records or

personnel records of law enforcement officers, may be requested or produced. Unnecessary
disclosure to the public of these records would cause embarrassment, annoyance and undue
burden within the meaning of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c).
This Court finds that good cause exists under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) and the Court
therefore hereby enters the following protective order:
I.

DEFINITIONS:

The following words and terms are defined for purposes of this

protective order:
A.

“Party” or “Parties” shall mean Plaintiff, Defendant(s), and any additional Party
to this matter that this Court may subsequently recognize as subject to this
protective order, and their respective attorney(s).

B.

When used in this Order, the word “document” or “documents” means all written,
recorded or graphic matter whatsoever, including but not limited to matter in
electronic form, produced by a Party pursuant to initial disclosures or discovery,
including but not limited to, documents produced by any Party or non-party in this
action whether pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure, subpoena, agreement,
deposition transcripts and exhibits, and/or any portion of any Court filings that
quote from or summarize any of the foregoing.

C.

“Confidential Matter” shall mean employment, disciplinary, investigatory,
financial, medical or other information that is of a sensitive or non-public nature
regarding Plaintiff, Defendant(s), non-party witnesses and non-party employees of
the Kansas Highway Patrol, the State of Kansas, and/or other law enforcement
agencies that may be subject to discovery in this action including, but not limited
Page 2 of 6
PROTECTIVE ORDER FOR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Vasquez. v. Lewis, et al., Case No. 12-4021-CM-JPO

to, all personnel files, disciplinary actions and histories, criminal investigatory or
security policies and procedures of the Highway Patrol, mental health and medical
information, criminal history information, and information that discloses
confidential sources, criminal investigation techniques or procedures, or
intelligence-gathering information.
II.

SCOPE: This Order governs all exchange, use or dissemination of information or the
production of documents designated as Confidential Matter.

III.

PARTIES’ AGREED TERMS AND CONDITIONS: The Parties will abide by the
following terms and conditions:
A.

The Parties will not use or disclose Confidential Matter released in this
proceeding for any other purpose or in any other proceeding.

B.

The Parties will take appropriate security measures when storing Confidential
Matter while it is in their possession.

C.

All Confidential Matter produced during the course of this proceeding shall be
returned to the producing Party within thirty (30) days of the final termination of
this action, defined as entry of final judgment and the expiration of the time for
appeal, or within 30 days of the entry of a mandate on any appeal if appeal is
taken.

D.

The individual pages of each document designated as Confidential Matter shall
bear the following designation:

CONFIDENTIAL.

DVDs, CDs or other

electronic matter shall be designated as “CONFIDENTIAL,” on the front of the

Page 3 of 6
PROTECTIVE ORDER FOR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Vasquez. v. Lewis, et al., Case No. 12-4021-CM-JPO

disc or as otherwise practicable.

Transcripts from confidential DVDs or CDs

shall be marked “CONFIDENTIAL.”
E.

No document, including DVDs or CDs, or transcripts therefrom, containing the
foregoing designation shall be copied in whole or in part without the designation
appearing on the copy.

F.

Before disclosing Confidential Matter to any persons involved in this litigation,
including but not limited to counsel, co-counsel, counsel’s staff, or expert or
consulting expert witnesses retained in connection with the litigation, counsel will
be responsible for informing each person that the documents or information
containing Confidential Matter are confidential, to be held in confidence, to be
used solely for the purpose of preparing for this litigation and that these
restrictions are imposed by a Court Order.

G.

To the extent that a Party believes in good faith that it has a right to redact
information, the Party may redact such information, provided that if a Party
redacts information from any Confidential Matter and the face of the document
itself does not make clear and obvious the nature of the information redacted, the
Party shall provide in writing a specific category of information redacted (for
example, social security number).

H.

By this Protective Order, the discovering Party does not waive its right to make
application to the Court, with proper notice, under the procedure set out by the
Court or under applicable rules, to the responding Party and other Parties to the
litigation, for a determination that any document designated as Confidential
Page 4 of 6
PROTECTIVE ORDER FOR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Vasquez. v. Lewis, et al., Case No. 12-4021-CM-JPO

Matter produced by the responding Party does not contain sensitive and nonpublic information, or that in certain circumstances the information should be
released from the provisions of this Protective Order. If a dispute does arise
concerning the propriety of designating particular documents as Confidential,
whether certain documents or information should be released from provisions of
this Protective Order, or concerning any other matter relating to the application of
this Order, counsel shall attempt to resolve the dispute by agreement before
asking the Court to resolve the dispute pursuant to the applicable rules of civil
procedure. The standard relevant to this determination is that of “good cause”
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c).
I.

The Parties understand and agree that Confidential Matter is subject to reasonable
use as necessary in this action only. Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties in
writing in advance of such filing, if a Party wishes to use Confidential Matter in
any affidavits, briefs, memorandum of law, or other filings in this litigation, a
Party must file a motion with the court seeking leave to file the document under
seal as per the Guidelines for Agreed Protective Orders and comply with the
procedures in D. Kan. 5.4.6.

J.

Nothing in this Protective Order shall be deemed a waiver of the right of any
Party to object to a request for discovery on the basis of relevance, materiality,
privilege, overbreadth, or any other recognized objection to discovery.

Page 5 of 6
PROTECTIVE ORDER FOR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Vasquez. v. Lewis, et al., Case No. 12-4021-CM-JPO

K. This Protective Order may be modified by written stipulation signed by the
Parties pursuant to these terms and by further order of the court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Entered this 14TH day of May, 2012.
s/ James P. O’Hara
Judge James P. O’Hara
United States Magistrate Judge

Page 6 of 6
PROTECTIVE ORDER FOR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Vasquez. v. Lewis, et al., Case No. 12-4021-CM-JPO