Janet Cabrera v. Nissan North America, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California partially granted the parties’ second stipulated motion for a protective order. The court limited confidential information to the categories supported by the parties’ good-cause statement and clarified that the court’s established practices and applicable rules govern any conflicting protective-order procedures.

Holdings

1. The court granted the second motion for a protective order in part.
2. A protective order may not bind the court or its personnel, and the court's established rules and practices govern to the extent the protective order conflicts with them.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the parties' second stipulated motion for a protective order should be granted.
2. What categories of information may properly be designated as confidential under the protective order.
3. Whether the protective order may bind the court or override the court's established rules and practices.

Disposition

other