Petrone v. Werner Enterprises, Inc. et al

Filing 169

ORDER - The "CONFIDENTIALITY" designations by Defendants of the four deposition transcripts consisting of the 30(b)(6) Corporate Designee witnesses, Jamie Maus, Jim Mullen, Steven Tisinger, and Mary Kay Howe are hereby stricken. Defenda nts' Brief in Opposition to Class Certification (8:12CV307 Filing No. 40 & 8:11CV401 Filing No. 133) and Plaintiffs' Reply Brief and Index of Evidence in Support of their Motion to Certify Class (8:12CV307 Filing Nos. 45-46, 49) are hereb y unsealed. The Index of Evidence and Exhibits attached to Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike "CONFIDENTIALITY" Designations by Defendants are hereby unsealed (8:12CV307 Filing No. 60 & 8:11CV401 Filing No. 156). Plaintiffs' motion to unseal defendants' Index of Evidence accompanying defendants' Brief in Opposition to Class Certification is denied. Member Cases: 8:11-cv-00401-LES-FG3, 8:12-cv-00307-LES-FG3Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (GJG)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
PHILLIP PETRONE, et al.,

)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
WERNER ENTERPRISES, INC., and )
DRIVERS MANAGEMENT, LLC,
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________________________)
PHILLIP PETRONE, et al.,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
WERNER ENTERPRISES, INC., and )
DRIVERS MANAGEMENT, LLC,
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________________________)

8:11CV401

8:12CV307

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the motion of
plaintiffs to strike confidentiality designations and unseal
certain materials so designated by defendants pursuant to the
parties’ stipulated protective order (Filing Nos. 57 and 153).
As the parties’ briefs indicate no real controversy, the Court
finds the plaintiffs’ motion should be granted as to the
deposition transcripts, the parties’ briefs regarding class
certification, plaintiffs’ Index of Evidence accompanying their
class certification reply brief, and the Index of Evidence and
Exhibits filed by plaintiffs in relation to the present motion.

Defendants’ Index of Evidence accompanying their Brief
in Opposition to Class Certification contains personal
confidential information that should remain protected.
Defendants only included the personal confidential information in
the Index with the understanding that the Index would have to be
filed under seal anyway because it included the transcripts which
had been labeled confidential.

Defendants, having relied on the

prior position of plaintiffs’ counsel that the transcripts should
be labeled confidential, have not acted inappropriately and
therefore should not be saddled with the burden of redacting the
Index.

Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1) The “CONFIDENTIALITY” designations by Defendants of

the four deposition transcripts consisting of the 30(b)(6)
Corporate Designee witnesses, Jamie Maus, Jim Mullen, Steven
Tisinger, and Mary Kay Howe are hereby stricken.
2) Defendants’ Brief in Opposition to Class
Certification (8:12CV307 Filing No. 40 & 8:11CV401 Filing No.
133) and Plaintiffs’ Reply Brief and Index of Evidence in Support
of their Motion to Certify Class (8:12CV307 Filing Nos. 45-46,
49) are hereby unsealed.
3) The Index of Evidence and Exhibits attached to
Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike “CONFIDENTIALITY” Designations by

-2-

Defendants are hereby unsealed (8:12CV307 Filing No. 60 &
8:11CV401 Filing No. 156).
4) Plaintiffs’ motion to unseal defendants’ Index of
Evidence accompanying defendants’ Brief in Opposition to Class
Certification is denied.
DATED this 16th day of September, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lyle E. Strom
____________________________
LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge
United States District Court

-3-