Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-01505/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-01505-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Account Receivable

---

R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

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 

RC1/371916.3/OAA 

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. CIV 02-1505 DFL PAN

 

1

TODD A. ROBERTS (SBN 129722) 

DEAN A. PAPPAS (SBN 115140) 

O. ANTONY ABDOLLAHI (SBN 157235) 

ROPERS, MAJESKI, KOHN & BENTLEY 

1001 Marshall Street 

Redwood City, California 94063 

Telephone: (650) 364-8200 

Facsimile: (650) 367-0997 

DEAN B. HERMAN (SBN 76752) 

MICHELMAN & ROBINSON, LLP 

15760 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 500 

Encino, CA 91436 

Telephone: 818-783-5530 

Facsimile: 818-783-5507 

Attorneys for Counter-Defendants 

TWIN CITY FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY and NUTMEG 

INSURANCE COMPANY 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

EVANSTON INSURANCE COMPANY, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

OEA, INC. and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, 

Defendants. 

CASE NO. CIV 02-1505 DFL PAN 

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE 

ORDER 

AND RELATED COUNTER-CLAIMS 

1. OEA, Inc. (“OEA”), Nutmeg Insurance Company (“Nutmeg”), and Twin City Fire 

Insurance Company (“Twin City”) acknowledge that some of the documents and materials to be 

produced in this litigation may contain or reflect confidential, proprietary and/or trade secret 

information and/or other privileged information. For example, NUTMEG and TWIN CITY have 

requested that OEA produce (a) documents and information from OEA’s defense files in the 

underlying Shugart and Wise actions, (b) OEA’s invoices for legal services in the Shugart and 

Wise actions, and (c) OEA’s invoices for legal services in this action (in connection with OEA’s 

claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing or otherwise for Brandt

Case 2:02-cv-01505-DFL-EFB Document 446 Filed 06/23/05 Page 1 of 6
R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

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 

RC1/371916.3/OAA 

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. CIV 02-1505 DFL PAN

 

2

fees). OEA believes that the documents and information described in the preceding sentence 

contain and reflect attorney-client privileged information, information protected by the attorney 

work product doctrine, and other information reflecting OEA’s litigation efforts and strategy in 

such actions. OEA has an especially heightened concern in that the Shugart action is still pending 

on appeal, and one of the remedies sought by OEA in the appeal of that action is a new trial. OEA 

is willing to produce such documents and information (subject to OEA’s responses to the 

discovery requests) in a manner that ensures the confidentiality of such documents and 

information, and that does not waive any privilege or other protection beyond the actual 

documents or information provided to NUTMEG and TWIN CITY. This Stipulation and 

Protective Order (“Order”) is being entered into in order to facilitate discovery and to avoid the 

necessity of motions and proceedings related to discovery among the parties and to protect the 

parties from waiver of any privileges or prejudice in this action or future litigation. 

2. Whenever a party hereto believes in good faith that the information or materials 

being disclosed reflect privileged, work product, proprietary and/or trade secret information, that 

party shall have the right to designate such information or materials as confidential either by 

marking the page or pages where such confidential information or material is contained 

“CONFIDENTIAL” prior to disclosure or by instructing the copy service to include a 

“CONFIDENTIAL” legend or stamp on such pages. The parties will agree to limit the use of the 

“CONFIDENTIAL” designation to those documents and information that in good faith are 

reasonably believed to contain proprietary information, trade secrets, attorney work product, 

privileged attorney-client communications, or personal or private information regarding an 

individual. 

3. Confidential information shall be used solely for the preparation and litigation of the 

above-captioned action, and shall not be given, shown, made available, discussed or otherwise 

communicated in any way except: 

A. to the attorneys for the parties in this litigation and employees of such 

attorneys; 

Case 2:02-cv-01505-DFL-EFB Document 446 Filed 06/23/05 Page 2 of 6
R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

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 

RC1/371916.3/OAA 

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. CIV 02-1505 DFL PAN

 

3

B. to the principals, employees, and agents of the parties (including in-house 

attorneys) who are involved in the preparation, litigation and/or settlement of 

this action and to persons or entities to whom the parties have a contractual 

statutory or regulatory obligation to report, as well as to court reporters and 

their staffs and professional photocopying vendors to whom disclosure is 

necessary in this action. 

C. to any person of whom testimony is taken or is to be taken in this litigation, 

except that such person may only be shown “CONFIDENTIAL” documents 

during his or her testimony (including depositions) and in preparation therefor 

and only to the extent necessary for such preparation of testimony; 

D. to any person who is a potential independent expert witness for the parties, but 

solely for the purpose of assisting in the preparation for trial or discovery, or for 

testifying at trial in this litigation; to this Court and any referee or special master 

appointed by the Court; and 

E. at trial, as otherwise admissible. 

4. The parties may further disclose “CONFIDENTIAL” information provided during 

the course of this litigation if the producing party expressly consents to such disclosure either in 

writing, on the record of any proceedings in this action, or if the Court specifically orders such 

disclosure. 

5. It shall be the responsibility of counsel to bring this Order to the attention of the 

witnesses and third parties who are identified in Paragraphs (B), (C) and (D) above to whom they 

propose to disclose confidential information and obtain their agreement to abide by its terms prior 

to disclosing any confidential information and/or the substance contained therein. Any such person 

to whom disclosure of “confidential” information is proposed shall agree in writing to abide by the 

terms of this Stipulation and Protective Order, as set forth in Exhibit A. It shall be the 

responsibility of counsel to obtain such consent prior to disclosing any “CONFIDENTIAL” 

documents and/or the substance contained therein to such person. 

Case 2:02-cv-01505-DFL-EFB Document 446 Filed 06/23/05 Page 3 of 6
R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

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 

RC1/371916.3/OAA 

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. CIV 02-1505 DFL PAN

 

4

6. All information designated or marked “CONFIDENTIAL” which is to be filed with 

the Court shall be filed with a motion to seal (DFL), unless otherwise agreed in writing. 

7. If any “CONFIDENTIAL” materials are used herein in any proceeding prior to the 

trial of this Action, they shall not lose their confidential status through such use. The production 

of (a) documents and information from OEA’s defense files in the underlying Shugart and Wise

actions, (b) OEA’s invoices for legal services in the Shugart and Wise actions, and (c) OEA’s 

invoices for legal services in this action shall not in any way waive any confidentiality, privilege, or 

other protection beyond the actual documents or information provided to NUTMEG and TWIN 

CITY, whether as to the specific information disclosed or as to any other information relating 

thereto or on the same or related subject matter. The inadvertent or unintentional disclosure by 

the producing party of confidential information, including by way of document production or 

disposition testimony, regardless of whether the information was so designated at the time of 

disclosure, shall not be deemed a waiver in whole or in part of a party’s claim of confidentiality, 

whether as to the specific information disclosed or as to any other information relating thereto or 

on the same or related subject matter. Any such inadvertently or unintentionally disclosed 

confidential information shall be treated as confidential information. 

8. When “CONFIDENTIAL” information is incorporated in a transcript of a 

deposition, hearing or other proceeding, counsel designating the information as 

“CONFIDENTIAL” shall have fourteen (14) days after receipt of such transcript to designate, in 

writing, the pages thereof to be treated as “CONFIDENTIAL” in accordance with the terms of 

this Order. Until such 14-day period has expired, the entire deposition transcript shall be treated 

as “CONFIDENTIAL.” Failure to designate the transcript in compliance with this Paragraph 8 

shall be deemed a waiver of this Order for purposes of this Paragraph 8. 

9. In the event a party believes that material designated “CONFIDENTIAL” does not 

contain “CONFIDENTIAL” information, that party may move the trial court for an order 

contesting the designation of the documents or information as “CONFIDENTIAL.” The burden 

of proving at the hearing that the documents or information which is protected by this Order shall 

remain with the party claiming and asserting the privilege. The documents shall retain confidential 

Case 2:02-cv-01505-DFL-EFB Document 446 Filed 06/23/05 Page 4 of 6
R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

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 

RC1/371916.3/OAA 

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. CIV 02-1505 DFL PAN

 

5

status at least until the Court has ruled upon the motion. 

10. Upon conclusion of the above-captioned action, including any appeals, all materials 

constituting or containing confidential information shall be returned to the producing party or 

destroyed, at the recipient’s option. In the event of destruction, the recipient shall certify to the 

producing party that all confidential information has been destroyed, except that recipients’ 

counsel shall be permitted to retain copies of documents and work product necessary for 

maintenance of a permanent file. In the event the recipient chooses to return the information to the 

producing party, it shall make such information available to the producing party at the location(s) 

where the information is then located. Insofar as the provisions of this Order restrict the 

communication and use of any confidential information, this Order will continue to be binding after 

the conclusion of the litigation, and disclosure can be made only with the express, written 

permission of the producing party, or as otherwise determined by this Court. 

11. Nothing in this Order shall be deemed to be or construed as an admission that any 

confidential information is relevant or otherwise admissible in evidence. The parties expressly 

reserve all objections as to the admissibility of confidential information at trial. Nothing in this 

Order shall abrogate or diminish any contractual, statutory, or other legal obligation or right with 

respect to any confidential information produced in this action. This Order shall survive the 

termination of this litigation. 

12. This Order may be entered without further notice. The Order shall be retroactive 

to the date the Order is signed by both counsel. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: June ___, 2005 THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP 

 ___________________________ 

 Lonnie E. Woolverton 

 James J. Moak 

 Daven Lowhurst 

 Attorneys for OEA, Inc. 

Case 2:02-cv-01505-DFL-EFB Document 446 Filed 06/23/05 Page 5 of 6
R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

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 

RC1/371916.3/OAA 

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. CIV 02-1505 DFL PAN

 

6

Dated: June ___, 2005 ROPERS, MAJESKI, KOHN & BENTLEY 

 ___________________________ 

 Todd A. Roberts 

 Dean A. Pappas 

Attorneys for Nutmeg Insurance Company 

and Twin City Fire Insurance Company 

IT IS SO ORDERED as amended at page 4, line 2. 

Dated: 22 June 2005 ________/s/ David F. Levi____________ 

 The Honorable David F. Levi 

United States District Court Judge 

Case 2:02-cv-01505-DFL-EFB Document 446 Filed 06/23/05 Page 6 of 6