Katz v. Steyn et al

Filing 148

ORDER that Plaintiff shall file a revised proposed protective order no later than July 29, 2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 7/24/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

CARY KATZ,

8
9
10

Plaintiff,
v.

13

ORDER

MARK STEYN, et al.,
Defendants.

11
12

Case No. 2:18-cv-00997-JAD-GWF

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Proposed Protective Order (ECF No. 146),
filed on July 22, 2019. Defendants filed their Objection (ECF No. 147) on July 23, 2019.

14

On July 15, 2019, the Court granted, in part, and denied, in part, Plaintiff’s motion for

15

protective order. See ECF No. 143. The Court directed Plaintiff to file a revised proposed

16

protective order that complied with the Court’s provisions. Defendants object to the proposed

17

protective order on the basis that it is labeled “stipulated” and because it does not comply with the

18

Court’s order.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

The Court has reviewed the proposed order and instructs Plaintiff to make the following
revisions to Paragraph 6.2:
6.2 Meet and Confer. The Challenging Party shall initiate the dispute resolution
process by providing written notice of each designation it is challenging. and
describing the basis for each challenge. To avoid ambiguity as to whether a
challenge has been made, the written notice must recite that the challenge to
confidentiality is being made in accordance with this specific paragraph of the
Protective Order. The parties shall attempt to resolve each challenge in good faith
and must begin the process by conferring directly (in voice to voice dialogue audio
recorded by both parties; other forms of communication are not sufficient) within
14 days of the date of service of notice. In conferring, The Challenging Party must
explain the basis for its belief that the confidentiality designation was not proper
and must give the Designating Party an opportunity to review the designated
material, to reconsider the circumstances, and, if no change in designation is
offered, to explain the basis for the chosen designation. A Challenging Party may
proceed to the next stage of the challenge process only if it has engaged in this meet
1

1

and confer process first or establishes in writing that the Designating Party is
unwilling to participate in the meet and confer process in a timely manner.

2

In addition, Plaintiff is instructed to revise the proposed protective order by

3

removing the term “stipulated” or “stipulation” in reference to the protective order.

4

Accordingly,

5
6
7

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a revised proposed protective
order no later than July 29, 2019.
Dated this 24th day of July, 2019.

8
9
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2