Summary
This document is a stipulated protective order entered in Everardo Alvarez Rios v. O’Reilly Auto Enterprises, LLC, a federal employment action in the Central District of California. It governs the designation, use, disclosure, challenge, filing under seal, and post-litigation disposition of confidential discovery materials, including personnel, workplace-investigation, workers’ compensation, health, wage, and benefits information.
Holdings
- The court found that a protective order was justified and entered the parties’ stipulated protective order to govern confidential discovery materials in the action.
- The stipulated protective order does not independently authorize filing confidential material under seal; a party must comply with Local Rule 79-5 and obtain a court order authorizing sealing of the specific material.
- Protected material may be used only for prosecuting, defending, or attempting to settle the action and may be disclosed only to the categories of persons and under the conditions specified in the protective order.
Questions Presented
- Whether good cause supported entry of a stipulated protective order governing confidential discovery materials.
- What procedures should govern designation, use, disclosure, challenge, sealing, and post-litigation disposition of protected discovery material.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (5)
- Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006)(followed)
- Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. General Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210–11 (9th Cir. 2002)(followed)
- Makar-Welbon v. Sony Electronics, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 576, 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999)(followed)
- Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Association, 605 F.3d 665, 677–79 (9th Cir. 2010)(followed)
- Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180–81 (9th Cir. 2006)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…