Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05563/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05563-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)

---

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

MELINDA S. RIECHERT, SBN: 65504

JENNIFER SVANFELDT, SBN: 233248

ROBERTA H. VESPREMI, SBN: 225067

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

One Market, Spear Street Tower

San Francisco, CA 94105-1126

Tel: +1.415.442.1000

Fax: +1.415.442.1001

E-mail: mriechert@morganlewis.com

jsvanfeldt@morganlewis.com

rvespremi@morganlewis.com

Sam S. Shaulson (pro hac vice app.

forthcoming)

MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

101 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10178-0060

Tel.: 212.309.6000

Fax: 212.309.6001

E-mail: sshaulson@morganlewis.com

Attorneys for Defendants

Jahan C. Sagafi (Cal. Bar No. 224887)

Julia Rabinovich (Cal. Bar No. 290730)

OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP

One Embarcadero Center, 38th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94111

Telephone: (415) 638-8800

Facsimile: (415) 638-8810

E-mail: jsagafi@outtengolden.com

E-mail: jrabinovich@outtengolden.com

Justin Swartz (admitted pro hac vice)

OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP

3 Park Avenue, 29th Floor

New York, NY 10016

Telephone: (212) 245-1000

Facsimile: (212) 977-4005

E-mail: jms@outtengolden.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff and proposed Class

Members

[Additional counsel on following page]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO/OAKLAND DIVISION

JASON ZAJONC, individually and on behalf

of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

MORGAN STANLEY & CO. LLC, f/k/a

Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated,

MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY

LLC, and MORGAN STANLEY,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

DISCOVERY MATTER

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 1 of 19
1

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

Gregg I. Shavitz (admitted pro hac vice)

Susan H. Stern (admitted pro hac vice)

Paolo C. Meireles (admitted pro hac vice)

Michael J. Palitz (admitted pro hac vice)

SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A.

1515 S. Federal Hwy., Suite 404

Boca Raton, Florida 33432

Telephone: (561) 447-8888

Facsimile: (561) 447-8831

E-mail: gshavitz@shavitzlaw.com

E-mail: sstern@shavitzlaw.com

E-mail: pmeireles@shavitzlaw.com

E-mail: mpalitz@shavitzlaw.com

Jeffrey A. Klafter (pro hac vice forthcoming)

Seth R. Lesser (admitted pro hac vice)

Fran L. Rudich (admitted pro hac vice)

KLAFTER OLSEN & LESSER, LLP

Two International Drive, Suite 350

Rye Brook, NY 10573

Telephone: (914) 934-9200

Facsimile: (914) 934-9220

E-mail: jak@klafterolsen.com

E-mail: seth@klafterolsen.com

E-mail: fran@klafterolsen.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff and proposed Class Members

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 2 of 19
2

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Defendants Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC, and Morgan

Stanley (collectively, “Defendants”) and Plaintiff Jason Zajonc (“Plaintiff”) (collectively, the

“Parties”), through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS

Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to involve production of

confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public

disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted.

Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the court to enter the following Stipulated

Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on

all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure

and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment

under applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3,

below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information

under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the

standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under

seal.

2. DEFINITIONS

2.1 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of

information or items under this Order.

2.2 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is

generated, stored or maintained) that includes trade secrets, special formulas, company security

matters, customer lists, financial data, projected sales data, production data, and data that touch

upon the topic of price, provided such information has not previously been disclosed by the

producing party to anyone except those in its employment or those retained by it, except to the

extent that such designation is contrary to California law.

2.3 Counsel (without qualifier): Outside Counsel of Record and In-House Counsel (as

well as their support staff).

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 3 of 19
3

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

2.4 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that

it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.”

2.5 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the

medium or manner in which it is generated, stored or maintained (including, among other things,

testimony, transcripts, and tangible things) that are produced or generated in disclosures or

responses to discovery in this matter.

2.6 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to

the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a

consultant in this action.

2.7 In-House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this action. InHouse Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel.

2.8 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal

entity not named as a Party to this action.

2.9 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a party to this

action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this action and have appeared in this action

on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on behalf of that party.

2.10 Party: any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, employees,

consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staffs).

2.11 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery

Material in this action.

2.12 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services

(e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and

organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and

subcontractors.

2.13 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as

“CONFIDENTIAL.”

2.14 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a

Producing Party.

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 4 of 19
4

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

2.15 Class Members: (a) if no class has been certified, then all individuals who satisfy

any class definition set forth in the operative complaint in this action; (b) if a Rule 23 class has

been certified, then all individuals who satisfy the class definition set by the Court.

3. SCOPE

The protections conferred by this Stipulated Protective Order cover not only Protected

Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected

Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any

testimony, conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected

Material. However, the protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order do not cover the

following information: (a) any information that is in the public domain at the time of disclosure to

a Receiving Party or becomes part of the public domain after its disclosure to a Receiving Party

as a result of publication not involving a violation of this Order, including becoming part of the

public record through trial or otherwise; and (b) any information known to the Receiving Party

prior to the disclosure or obtained by the Receiving Party after the disclosure from a source who

obtained the information lawfully and under no obligation of confidentiality to the Designating

Party. Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by a separate agreement or order.

4. DURATION

Even after final disposition of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations imposed by

this Order shall remain in effect until a Designating Party agrees otherwise in writing or a court

order otherwise directs. Final disposition shall be deemed to be the later of (1) dismissal of all

claims and defenses in this action, with or without prejudice; and (2) final judgment herein after

the completion and exhaustion of all appeals, rehearings, remands, trials, or reviews of this action,

including the time limits for filing any motions or applications for extension of time pursuant to

applicable law.

5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL

5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection. Each Party

or Non-Party that designates information or items for protection under this Order must take care

to limit any such designation to specific material that qualifies under the appropriate standards.

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 5 of 19
5

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

The Designating Party must designate for protection only those parts of material, documents,

items, or oral or written communications that qualify – so that other portions of the material,

documents, items, or communications for which protection is not warranted are not swept

unjustifiably within the ambit of this Order.

Mass, indiscriminate, or routinized designations are prohibited. Designations that are

shown to be clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper purpose (e.g., to

unnecessarily encumber or retard the case development process or to impose unnecessary

expenses and burdens on other parties) expose the Designating Party to sanctions. If it comes to a

Designating Party’s attention that information or items that it designated for protection do not

qualify for protection, that Designating Party must promptly notify all other Parties that it is

withdrawing the mistaken designation.

5.2 Manner and Timing of Designations. Except as otherwise provided in this Order

(see, e.g., second paragraph of section 5.2(a) below), or as otherwise stipulated or ordered,

Disclosure or Discovery Material that qualifies for protection under this Order must be clearly so

designated before the material is disclosed or produced.

Designation in conformity with this Order requires:

(a) For information in documentary form (e.g., paper or electronic documents,

but excluding transcripts of depositions or other pretrial or trial proceedings), that the Producing

Party affix the legend “CONFIDENTIAL” to each page that contains protected material. If only

a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also

must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the

margins).

A Party or Non-Party that makes original documents or materials available for

inspection need not designate them for protection until after the inspecting Party has indicated

which material it would like copied and produced. During the inspection and before the

designation, all of the material made available for inspection shall be deemed

“CONFIDENTIAL.” After the inspecting Party has identified the documents it wants copied and

produced, the Producing Party must determine which documents, or portions thereof, qualify for

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 6 of 19
6

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

protection under this Order. Then, before producing the specified documents, the Producing

Party must affix the “CONFIDENTIAL” legend to each page that contains Protected Material. If

only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party

also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the

margins).

(b) For testimony given in deposition or in other pretrial or trial proceedings,

that the Designating Party identify on the record, before the close of the deposition, hearing, or

other proceeding, all protected testimony, or, for deposition testimony, that the Designating Party

identify all protected testimony in writing at any time up to and including the fifteenth day after

the date of receipt of the deposition transcript. Deposition testimony shall automatically be

deemed to be CONFIDENTIAL subject to the terms of this Order until the end of the fifteenth

day after the date of receipt of the deposition transcript. Should the Non-Designating Party desire

to file or otherwise disclose a portion of a deposition transcript before the expiration of the 15-day

period, the parties shall meet and confer in good faith, by e-mail or otherwise, as to whether the

subject portion of the transcript is CONFIDENTIAL.

(c) For information produced in some form other than documentary and for

any other tangible items, that the Producing Party affix in a prominent place on the exterior of the

container or containers in which the information or item is stored the legend “CONFIDENTIAL.”

If only a portion or portions of the information or item warrant protection, the Producing Party, to

the extent practicable, shall identify the protected portion(s).

5.3 Inadvertent Failures to Designate. An inadvertent failure to designate qualified

information or items does not, standing alone, waive the Designating Party’s right to secure

protection under this Order for such material so long as the issue is brought to the attention of

opposing counsel within a reasonable amount of time after discovery of the failure to designate as

measured by the particular circumstances of the subject production. Upon timely correction of a

designation, the Receiving Party must make reasonable efforts to assure that the material is

treated in accordance with the provisions of this Order.

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 7 of 19
7

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

6. CHALLENGING CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS

6.1 Timing of Challenges. Any Party or Non-Party may challenge a designation of

confidentiality at any time. Unless a prompt challenge to a Designating Party’s confidentiality

designation, it shall provide written notice of each designation it is challenging and describe 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. Counsel for the parties shall attempt to resolve

any challenge in good faith on an expedited and informal basis. If the challenge cannot be

expeditiously and informally resolved, any Party may, on reasonable notice not less than two

business days, apply for appropriate ruling(s) from the Court. The parties shall attempt to resolve

each challenge in good faith and must begin the process by conferring directly (in voice to voice

dialogue; 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 and confer process first

or establishes that the Designating Party is unwilling to participate in the meet and confer process

in a timely manner.

6.2 Judicial Intervention. If the Parties cannot resolve a challenge without court

intervention, the Designating Party shall file and serve a motion to retain confidentiality under

Civil Local Rule 7 (and in compliance with Civil Local Rule 79-5, if applicable) within 21 days

of the initial notice of challenge or within 14 days of the parties agreeing that the meet and confer

process will not resolve their dispute, whichever is earlier. Each such motion must be

accompanied by a competent declaration affirming that the movant has complied with the meet

and confer requirements imposed in the preceding paragraph. Failure by the Designating Party to

make such a motion including the required declaration within 21 days (or 14 days, if applicable)

shall automatically waive the confidentiality designation for each challenged designation. In

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 8 of 19
8

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

addition, the Challenging Party may file a motion challenging a confidentiality designation at any

time if there is good cause for doing so, including a challenge to the designation of a deposition

transcript or any portions thereof. Any motion brought pursuant to this provision must be

accompanied by a competent declaration affirming that the movant has complied with the meet

and confer requirements imposed by the preceding paragraph.

The burden of persuasion in any such challenge proceeding shall be on the Designating

Party. Frivolous challenges, and those made for an improper purpose (e.g., to harass or impose

unnecessary expenses and burdens on other parties) may expose the Challenging Party to

sanctions. Unless the Designating Party has waived the confidentiality designation by failing to

file a motion to retain confidentiality as described above, all parties shall continue to afford the

material in question the level of protection to which it is entitled under the Producing Party’s

designation until the court rules on the challenge.

7. ACCESS TO AND USE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL

7.1 Basic Principles. A Receiving Party may use Protected Material that is disclosed

or produced by another Party or by a Non-Party in connection with this case only for prosecuting,

defending, or attempting to settle this litigation. Such Protected Material may be disclosed only

to the categories of persons and under the conditions described in this Order. When the litigation

has been terminated, a Receiving Party must comply with the provisions of section 13 below

(FINAL DISPOSITION). Nothing in this Stipulated Protective Order prevents any party from

using any document at trial.

Protected Material must be stored and maintained by a Receiving Party at a location and

in a secure manner that ensures that access is limited to the persons authorized under this Order.

7.2 Disclosure of “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items. Unless otherwise

ordered by the court or permitted in writing by the Designating Party, a Receiving Party may

disclose any information or item designated “CONFIDENTIAL” only to:

(a) Defendants;

(b) Plaintiffs;

(c) Class Members, to the extent such “CONFIDENTIAL” information

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 9 of 19
9

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

contains data that concerns said Class Members, or is a policy that applies or applied to said Class

Members;

(d) the Receiving Party’s Outside Counsel of Record in this action, as well as

employees and partners of said Outside Counsel of Record to whom it is reasonably necessary to

disclose the information for this litigation;

(e) the officers, directors, and employees (including In-House Counsel) of the

Receiving Party to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this litigation;

(f) Experts (as defined in this Order) of the Receiving Party to whom

disclosure is reasonably necessary for this litigation and who have signed the “Acknowledgment

and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A);

(g) mediators retained or assigned by the parties and/or the court, and their

staff, to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for the settlement of this litigation;

(h) the court and its personnel;

(i) court reporters and their staff, professional jury or trial consultants, mock

jurors, and Professional Vendors to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this litigation

and who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A);

(j) during their depositions, Non-Party witnesses in the action to whom

disclosure is reasonably necessary and who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to

Be Bound” (Exhibit A), unless otherwise set forth in Sections 7.2 (a)-(l), agreed by the

Designating Party, or ordered by the court. Pages of transcribed deposition testimony or exhibits

to depositions that reveal Protected Material must be separately bound by the court reporter and

may not be disclosed to anyone except as permitted under this Stipulated Protective Order;

(k) the author or recipient of a document containing the information or a

custodian or other person who otherwise possessed or knew the information; and

(l) any individual who has already seen such document.

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 10 of 19
10

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

8. PROTECTED MATERIAL SUBPOENAED OR ORDERED PRODUCED IN OTHER

LITIGATION

If a Party is served with a subpoena or a court order issued in other litigation that compels

disclosure of any information or items designated in this action as “CONFIDENTIAL,” that Party

must:

(a) promptly notify in writing the Designating Party. Such notification shall

include a copy of the subpoena or court order;

(b) promptly notify in writing the party who caused the subpoena or order to

issue in the other litigation that some or all of the material covered by the subpoena or order is

subject to this Protective Order. Such notification shall include a copy of this Stipulated

Protective Order; and

(c) cooperate with respect to all reasonable procedures sought to be pursued by

the Designating Party whose Protected Material may be affected.

If the Designating Party timely seeks a protective order, the Party served with the

subpoena or court order shall not produce any information designated in this action as

“CONFIDENTIAL” before a determination by the court from which the subpoena or order

issued, unless the Party has obtained the Designating Party’s permission. The Designating Party

shall bear the burden and expense of seeking protection in that court of its confidential material –

and nothing in these provisions should be construed as authorizing or encouraging a Receiving

Party in this action to disobey a lawful directive from another court.

9. A NON-PARTY’S PROTECTED MATERIAL SOUGHT TO BE PRODUCED IN THIS

LITIGATION

(a) The terms of this Order are applicable to information produced by a NonParty in this action and designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” Such information produced by NonParties in connection with this litigation is protected by the remedies and relief provided by this

Order. Nothing in these provisions should be construed as prohibiting a Non-Party from seeking

additional protections.

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 11 of 19
11

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

(b) In the event that a Party is required, by a valid discovery request, to

produce a Non-Party’s confidential information in its possession, and the Party is subject to an

agreement with the Non-Party not to produce the Non-Party’s confidential information, then the

Party shall:

1. promptly notify in writing the Requesting Party and the Non-Party

that some or all of the information requested is subject to a confidentiality agreement with a NonParty;

2. promptly provide the Non-Party with a copy of the Stipulated

Protective Order in this litigation, the relevant discovery request(s), and a reasonably specific

description of the information requested; and

3. make the information requested available for inspection by the

Non-Party.

(c) If the Non-Party fails to object or seek a protective order from this court

within 14 days of receiving the notice and accompanying information, the Receiving Party may

produce the Non-Party’s confidential information responsive to the discovery request. If the NonParty timely seeks a protective order, the Receiving Party shall not produce any information in its

possession or control that is subject to the confidentiality agreement with the Non-Party before a

determination by the court. Absent a court order to the contrary, the Non-Party shall bear the

burden and expense of seeking protection in this court of its Protected Material.

10. UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL

If a Receiving Party learns that, by inadvertence or otherwise, it has disclosed Protected

Material to any person or in any circumstance not authorized under this Stipulated Protective

Order, the Receiving Party must immediately (a) notify in writing the Designating Party of the

unauthorized disclosures, (b) use its best efforts to retrieve all unauthorized copies of the

Protected Material, (c) inform the person or persons to whom unauthorized disclosures were

made of all the terms of this Order, and (d) request such person or persons to execute the

“Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” that is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 12 of 19
12

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

11. INADVERTENT PRODUCTION OF PRIVILEGED OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED

MATERIAL

When a Producing Party gives notice to Receiving Parties that certain inadvertently

produced material is subject to a claim of privilege or other protection, the obligations of the

Receiving Parties are those set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5)(B). This

provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery

order that provides for production without prior privilege review. Pursuant to Federal Rule of

Evidence 502(d) and (e), insofar as the parties reach an agreement on the effect of disclosure of a

communication or information covered by the attorney-client privilege or work product

protection, the parties may incorporate their agreement in the Stipulated Protective Order

submitted to the court.

12. MISCELLANEOUS

12.1 Right to Further Relief. Nothing in this Order abridges the right of any person to

seek its modification by the court in the future.

12.2 Right to Assert Other Objections. By stipulating to the entry of this Protective

Order no Party waives any right it otherwise would have to object to disclosing or producing any

information or item on any ground not addressed in this Stipulated Protective Order. Similarly, no

Party waives any right to object on any ground to use in evidence of any of the material covered

by this Stipulated Protective Order.

12.3 Filing Protected Material. Without written permission from the Designating Party

or a court order secured after appropriate notice to all interested persons, a Party may not file in

the public record in this action any Protected Material. A Party that seeks to file under seal any

Protected Material must comply with Civil Local Rule 79-5. Protected Material may only be filed

under seal pursuant to a court order authorizing the sealing of the specific Protected Material at

issue. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5, a sealing order will issue only upon a request

establishing that the Protected Material at issue is privileged, protectable as a trade secret, or

otherwise entitled to protection under the law. If a Receiving Party's request to file Protected

Material under seal pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(d) is denied by the court, then the

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 13 of 19
13

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

Receiving Party may file the information in the public record pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(e)

unless otherwise instructed by the court.

13. FINAL DISPOSITION

Within 60 days after the final disposition of this action, as defined in Section 4, each

Receiving Party must return all Protected Material to the Producing Party or destroy such material.

As used in this subdivision, “all Protected Material” includes all copies, abstracts, compilations,

summaries, and any other format reproducing or capturing any of the Protected Material. Whether

the Protected Material is returned or destroyed, the Receiving Party must submit a written

certification to the Producing Party (and, if not the same person or entity, to the Designating Party)

by the 60 day deadline that (1) identifies (by category, where appropriate) all the Protected Material

that was returned or destroyed and (2) affirms that the Receiving Party has not retained any copies,

abstracts, compilations, summaries or any other format reproducing or capturing any of the

Protected Material, upon written request by the Producing Party. Notwithstanding this provision,

Counsel are entitled to retain an archival copy of all pleadings, motion papers, trial, deposition, and

hearing transcripts, legal memoranda, correspondence, deposition and trial exhibits, expert reports,

attorney work product, and consultant and expert work product, even if such materials contain

Protected Material. Any such archival copies that contain or constitute Protected Material remain

subject to this Stipulated Protective Order as set forth in Section 4 (DURATION). This Stipulation

shall not be interpreted in a manner that would violate any applicable cannons of ethics or codes of

professional responsibility. Nothing in this Stipulation shall prohibit or interfere with the ability of

counsel for any party, or experts specially retained for this case, to represent any individual,

corporation, or other entity adverse to any party or its affiliate(s) in connection with any other

matters.

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 14 of 19
14

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: June 19, 2015 MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

By: /s/ Melinda S. Riechert

Samuel S. Shaulson

Melinda S. Riechert

Jennifer Svanfeldt

Roberta H. Vespremi

Attorneys for Defendants

MORGAN STANLEY & CO. LLC,

MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY

LLC, and MORGAN STANLEY

Dated: June 19, 2015 OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP

By: /s/ Jahan C. Sagafi

Jahan C. Sagafi

Justin M. Swartz

Julia Rabinovich

SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A.

Gregg I. Shavitz

Susan H. Stern

Paolo C. Meireles

Michael J. Palitz

KLAFTER OLSEN & LESSER, LLP

Seth R. Lesser

Fran L. Rudich

Attorneys for Plaintiff and proposed Class

Members

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 15 of 19
15

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO/OAKLAND DIVISION

JASON ZAJONC, individually and on behalf

of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

MORGAN STANLEY & CO. LLC, f/k/a

Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated,

MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY

LLC, and MORGAN STANLEY,

Defendant.

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

EXHIBIT A

AGREEMENT TO BE BOUND BY

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

I, ___________________________________, declare as follows:

1. I have read and am familiar with the terms of the Stipulated Protective Order

(“Protective Order”) in the above-captioned case governing disclosure of information designated

as confidential.

2. I have been instructed by counsel for ____________ that the Court has ordered

any information designated as “confidential” other than my own records shall be kept confidential

and that I may not disclose, convey, publish, or duplicate any confidential information other than

under the limited conditions permitted in the Protective Order.

3. I agree to abide by all the terms of the Protective Order and will not reveal or

otherwise communicate to anyone any confidential information disclosed to me pursuant thereto

except in accordance with the terms of the Protective Order.

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 16 of 19
16

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

4. I agree to return to producing counsel any and all documentation delivered to me

under the terms of the Protective Order and all copies thereof and to destroy any notes in my

possession containing any confidential information covered by the terms of this Protective Order.

5. I acknowledge that the Protective Order is binding on me. I consent to the

personal jurisdiction of the above-captioned Court for the purposes of determining whether I have

complied with this Protective Order, and, if I have not complied, whether to impose sanctions

and/or attorneys’ fees and costs as the Court may, after notice and an opportunity to be heard,

deem appropriate.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

foregoing is true and correct.

Executed this ____ day of ______________, 2015, at __________________.

____________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

____________________________________

Address

____________________________________

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 17 of 19
17

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

FILER’S ATTESTATION

I, Melinda S. Riechert, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used

to file this Stipulation. In compliance with L.R. 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that Jahan Sagafi

concurs in this filing.

Dated: June 19, 2015 /s/ Melinda S. Riechert

Melinda S. Riechert

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 18 of 19
18

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 3:14-cv-05563-EMC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MORGAN, LEWIS &

BOCKIUS LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

DB1/ 83562661.1

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the Parties’ [Proposed] Stipulated Protective Order, the Stipulation is

approved and the Stipulated Protective Order is entered as proposed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: ___________________ ______________________________

HON. EDWARD M. CHEN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

6/22/15

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:14-cv-05563-EMC Document 81 Filed 06/22/15 Page 19 of 19