Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01338/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01338-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

No. 2:14-CV-01338-KJM-EFB: STIP. PROTEC. ORDER RE: ATTACHMENT A TO S.W. S13-149 

 

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

MICHAEL J. HADDAD (State Bar No. 189114) 

JULIA SHERWIN (State Bar No. 189268) 

GENEVIEVE K. GUERTIN (State Bar No. 262479) 

T. KENNEDY HELM (State Bar No. 282319) 

HADDAD & SHERWIN LLP 

505 Seventeenth Street 

Oakland, California 94612 

Telephone: (510) 452-5500 

Facsimile: (510) 452-5510 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Bobby Johnson, 

Sharon Johnson, Tanya Johnson, 

and Angela Johnson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BOBBY DARRELL JOHNSON; SHARON KAY 

JOHNSON; TANYA SUEANN JOHNSON; and 

ANGELA JOHNSON, a minor, through her mother 

and Next Friend, TANYA JOHNSON; individually, 

 Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

SHASTA COUNTY, a public entity; SHASTA 

COUNTY SHERIFF DEPUTIES CARY 

ERICKSON, TOM FLEMMING, RAY HUGHES, 

DAVID RENFER, and KYLE WALLACE; 

SHASTA COUNTY SHERIFF SERGEANT ERIC 

MAGRINI, and SHASTA COUNTY SHERIFF 

DETECTIVES GENE RANDAL, NICK 

THOMPSON, and CRAIG TIPPINGS; SHASTA 

COUNTY VOLUNTEER DR. JESSE WELLS, 

M.D.; SUTTER COUNTY, a public entity; SUTTER 

COUNTY SHERIFF DETECTIVE MATTHEW 

MAPLES, SUTTER COUNTY SHERIFF 

LIEUTENANT JAMES CASNER, and SUTTER 

COUNTY SHERIFF OFFICER MICHAEL T. 

GWINNUP, and DOES 1–10, Jointly and Severally, 

 Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No: 2:14-CV-01338-KJM-EFB 

Hon. Kimberly J. Mueller 

STIPULATED (DRAFT) 

PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: 

THE CONTENTS OF THE 

ENVELOPE CONTAINING 

ATTACHMENT A TO 

SEARCH WARRANT NO. S13-

149 

Case 2:14-cv-01338-KJM-EFB Document 53 Filed 07/28/15 Page 1 of 8
No. 2:14-CV-01338-KJM-EFB: STIP. PROTEC. ORDER RE: ATTACHMENT A TO S.W. S13-149 2 

 

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

The parties, by and through their respective attorneys of record, hereby stipulate to the 

following protective order being issued in this matter: 

1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 

 Plaintiffs seek disclosure of the sealed portions of search warrant No. S13-149, ordered 

sealed by Judge Aronson of the Sutter County Superior Court, and entitled “Attachment A,” which 

contain confidential or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and 

from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation would be warranted. Accordingly, 

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

Order regarding the Contents of the Envelope Containing Attachment A to Search Warrant No. 

S13-149. 

2. DEFINITIONS 

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

consultants, retained experts, and outside counsel (and their support staff). 

2.2 “Confidential-Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” The designation “CONFIDENTIAL–

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” is limited to Attachment “A” and related document of the sealed 

portion of search warrant No. S13-149 issued by the Sutter County Superior Court. 

2.4 Protected Material: any document designated as CONFIDENTIAL–

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or any information contained therein. 

2.5 Outside Counsel: attorneys who are not employees of a Party but who are retained 

to represent or advise a Party in this action. 

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 and who is not a past or a current employee of a Party or of a competitor 

of a Party’s and who, at the time of retention, is not anticipated to become an employee of a Party 

or a competitor of a Party’s. 

Case 2:14-cv-01338-KJM-EFB Document 53 Filed 07/28/15 Page 2 of 8
No. 2:14-CV-01338-KJM-EFB: STIP. PROTEC. ORDER RE: ATTACHMENT A TO S.W. S13-149 3 

 

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

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

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

storing, retrieving data in any form or medium; etc.) and their employees and subcontractors. 

3. SCOPE 

 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material 

(as defined above), but also any information copied or extracted therefrom, as well as all copies, 

excerpts, summaries, or compilations thereof, plus testimony, conversations, or presentations by 

parties or counsel to or in court or in other settings that might reveal Protected Material. 

4. DURATION 

 Even after the termination 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. 

5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL 

5.1 for information in documentary form (apart from transcripts of depositions or other 

pretrial or trial proceedings), that the Producing Party affix the legend or watermark 

“CONFIDENTIAL–ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” on 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) and must specify, for each portion that it is “CONFIDENTIAL–ATTORNEYS’ EYES 

ONLY.” 

 5.1.1 for testimony given in deposition or in other pretrial or trial proceedings, that the 

Party or non-party offering or sponsoring the testimony identify on the record, before the close of 

the deposition, hearing, or other proceeding, all protected testimony, and further specify any 

portions of the testimony that qualify as “CONFIDENTIAL–ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” 

When it is impractical to identify separately each portion of testimony that is entitled to protection, 

Case 2:14-cv-01338-KJM-EFB Document 53 Filed 07/28/15 Page 3 of 8
No. 2:14-CV-01338-KJM-EFB: STIP. PROTEC. ORDER RE: ATTACHMENT A TO S.W. S13-149 4 

 

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

and when it appears that substantial portions of the testimony may qualify for protection, the Party 

or non-party that sponsors, offers, or gives the testimony may invoke on the record (before the 

deposition or proceeding is concluded) a right to have up to twenty (20) days to identify the 

specific portions of the testimony as or “CONFIDENTIAL–ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” Only 

those portions of the testimony that are appropriately designated for protection within the 20 days 

shall be covered by the provisions of this Stipulated Protective Order. 

Transcript pages containing Protected Material must be separately bound by the court 

reporter, who must affix to the top of each such page the legend “CONFIDENTIAL–

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” as instructed by the Party or non-party offering or sponsoring the 

witness or presenting the testimony. 

6. ACCESS TO AND USE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL 

6.1 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 9, below (FINAL 

DISPOSITION). 

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. 

6.2 Disclosure of Protected Materials “CONFIDENTIAL–ATTORNEYS’ EYES 

ONLY.” 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–

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY only to: 

(a) the counsel of record for the Parties in this action, as well as employees of 

said counsel to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose the information for this litigation; 

Case 2:14-cv-01338-KJM-EFB Document 53 Filed 07/28/15 Page 4 of 8
No. 2:14-CV-01338-KJM-EFB: STIP. PROTEC. ORDER RE: ATTACHMENT A TO S.W. S13-149 5 

 

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

(b) experts (as defined in this Order) of the Receiving Party to whom disclosure 

is reasonably necessary for this litigation; 

(c) the Court and its personnel; 

(d) court reporters, their staffs, and professional vendors to whom disclosure is 

reasonably necessary for this litigation; 

(e) during their depositions, witnesses, except for Plaintiffs. 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. 

 6.3 Disclosure of documents “CONFIDENTIAL–ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” or 

any information contained therein, may not be disclosed to any Plaintiff in this action, nor to any 

relatives of Plaintiffs, including to Mark Johnson or Jerry Johnson. 

7. UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL 

 If by inadvertence or otherwise, Protected Material is disclosed to any person or in any 

circumstance not authorized under this Stipulated Protective Order, the Receiving Party must 

immediately: (a) notify the court of the unauthorized disclosures, (b) use its best efforts to retrieve 

all 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 be 

bound by the Stipulated Protective Order. 

8. FILING PROTECTED MATERIAL 

 Consistent with Judge Mueller’s Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order (Doc. 32), “if a party 

plans to make a filing that includes material an opposing party has identified as confidential and 

potentially subject to sealing, the filing party shall provide the opposing party with sufficient 

notice in advance of filing to allow for the seeking of an order of sealing or redaction from the 

court.” (Doc. 32, p. 5). Furthermore, and consistent with Judge Mueller’s Status (Pretrial 

Case 2:14-cv-01338-KJM-EFB Document 53 Filed 07/28/15 Page 5 of 8
No. 2:14-CV-01338-KJM-EFB: STIP. PROTEC. ORDER RE: ATTACHMENT A TO S.W. S13-149 6 

 

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

Scheduling) Order, “[t]he court will only consider requests to seal or redact filed by the proponent 

of sealing or redaction.” (Doc. 32, p. 5). All requests to seal or redact shall be governed by Local 

Rules 141 (sealing) and 140 (redaction); protective orders covering the discovery phase of 

litigation shall not govern the filing of sealed or redacted documents on the public docket. (Doc. 

32, p. 5). 

9. FINAL DISPOSITION 

Unless otherwise ordered or agreed in writing by the Producing Party, within sixty (60) 

days after the final termination of this action, defined as the dismissal or entry of judgment by the 

district court, or if an appeal is filed, the disposition of the appeal, each Receiving Party must 

return all Protected Material to the Producing Party. As used in this subdivision, “all Protected 

Material” includes all copies, abstracts, compilations, summaries or any other form of reproducing 

or capturing any of the Protected Material. The Receiving Party must submit a written 

certification to the court by the sixty day deadline that all the Protected Material was returned and 

that affirms that the Receiving Party has not retained any copies, abstracts, compilations, 

summaries or other forms of reproducing or capturing any of the Protected Material. 

Notwithstanding this provision, Counsel are entitled to retain an archival copy of all pleadings, 

motion papers, transcripts, legal memoranda, correspondence or attorney work product, even if 

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

Protected Material remain subject to this Protective Order as set forth in Section 4 (DURATION), 

above. 

10. MISCELLANEOUS 

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

seek its modification by the Court in the future. 

10.2 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 

Case 2:14-cv-01338-KJM-EFB Document 53 Filed 07/28/15 Page 6 of 8
No. 2:14-CV-01338-KJM-EFB: STIP. PROTEC. ORDER RE: ATTACHMENT A TO S.W. S13-149 7 

 

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

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

this Protective Order. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD. 

Dated: July 27, 2015 HADDAD & SHERWIN LLP 

 T. Kennedy Helm 

T. KENNEDY HELM 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Dated: July 27, 2015 BRICKWOOD LAW OFFICE 

 Gary Brickwood* 

GARY BRICKWOOD 

Attorneys for Defendants SHASTA COUNTY, 

CARY ERICKSON, TOM FLEMMING, RAY 

HUGES, DAVID RENFER, KYLE WALLACE, 

ERIC MAGRINI, GENE RANDAL, NICK 

THOMPSON, CRAIG TIPPINGS, and DR. JESSE 

A. WELLS, M.D. 

Dated: July 27, 2015 PORTER SCOTT 

 John R. Whitefleet* 

JOHN R. WHITEFLEET 

 Attorneys for Defendants SUTTER COUNTY, 

 MATTHEW MAPLES, JAMES CASNER, and 

 MICHAEL T. GWINNUP 

*Messrs. Brickwood and Whitefleet provided their consent that this document be 

electronically filed with their e-signatures. 

Case 2:14-cv-01338-KJM-EFB Document 53 Filed 07/28/15 Page 7 of 8
No. 2:14-CV-01338-KJM-EFB: STIP. PROTEC. ORDER RE: ATTACHMENT A TO S.W. S13-149 8 

 

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

ORDER 

 Plaintiff filed a motion to compel non-party Mary Todd’s compliance with a subpoena 

duces tecum. ECF No. 35. The subpoena directs Ms. Todd, the Clerk of the Court for the 

California Superior Court for the County of Sutter, to produce an attachment to a search warrant 

that was filed under seal pursuant to a state court order. The motion to compel was heard on June 

17, 2015. ECF No. 45. At the hearing, this court directed the parties to first seek disclosure from 

the state court by following its procedure for petitioning that court for a disclosure order. See 

Goldstein v. City of Long Beach, 603 F. Supp. 2d 1242, 1252 (C.D. Cal. 2009). The court 

reserved ruling on the motion in this action pending the parties’ efforts to obtain the sealed 

document(s) through state court procedures. They have submitted this stipulated request for a 

protective order to assist in that effort. 

 Accordingly, the stipulation is approved and so ordered. 

DATED: July 28, 2015. 

Case 2:14-cv-01338-KJM-EFB Document 53 Filed 07/28/15 Page 8 of 8