Gag Order Denied

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: PARTIES’ PROPOSED STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Or Translate this:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WESTERN DIVISION

JOHN G. BRANCA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 

HEAL THE WORLD FOUNDATION,

et al.,

Defendants.

and related counterclaims.

))))))))))))))

No. CV 09-7084-DMG (PLAx)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE:

PARTIES’ PROPOSED STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

The Court has received and considered the parties’ proposed Stipulated Protective Order

(Protective Order). The Court is unable to adopt the Protective Order as stipulated to by the

parties for the followings reasons:

First, if confidential material is included in any papers to be filed in Court, such papers shall

be accompanied by an application to file the papers — or the confidential portion thereof — under

seal; the application must show good cause for the under seal filing. (See pages 3-4, at ¶

5). The application shall be directed to the judge to whom the papers are directed. Pending the

ruling on the application, the papers or portions thereof subject to the sealing application shall be

lodged under seal.

 

Second, in the event of a dispute regarding the designation or disclosure of confidential

information, the procedure for obtaining a decision from the Court is that set forth in Local Rule

37. (See pages 5-6, at ¶ 9). If the parties want to file the Joint Stipulation required by Local Rule

37 under seal, the parties may file a stipulation to that effect or the moving party may file an ex

parte application making the appropriate request. The parties must set forth good cause in the

stipulation or ex parte application as to why the Joint Stipulation or portions thereof should be filed

under seal.

Third, once a case proceeds to trial, all of the information that was designated as

confidential and/or kept and maintained pursuant to the terms of a protective order becomes public

and will be presumptively available to all members of the public, including the press, unless good

cause is shown to the district judge in advance of the trial to proceed otherwise. The Court will

not enter a protective order that extends beyond the commencement of trial.

Fourth, the parties should not include any language in the Protective Order that obligates

the Court or its personnel to act in a certain manner or limits its actions in relation to the

confidential documents. (See, e.g., page 7, at ¶ 14).

Finally, the Court may only enter a protective order upon a showing of good cause. Phillips

v. G.M. Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1209 (9th Cir. 2002) (Rule 26(c) requires a showing of good cause

for a protective order); Makar-Wellbon v. Sony Electronics, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 576, 577 (E.D.Wis.

1999) (even stipulated protective orders require good cause showing). The parties’ stipulation fails

to include any statements to demonstrate good cause for issuing the protective

order. In any revised stipulated protective order submitted to the Court, the parties must include

a statement demonstrating good cause for entry of a protective order pertaining to the documents

or information described in the order. The paragraph containing the statement of good cause

should be preceded by a heading stating: GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT.

DATED: October 14, 2010

PAUL L. ABRAMS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE