Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-00226/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-00226-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act

---

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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 

Patrick E. Gibbs (Bar No. 183174) 

Matthew Rawlinson (Bar No. 231890) 

140 Scott Drive 

Menlo Park, California 94025 

Telephone: +1.650.463.2690 

Facsimile: +1.650.463.2600 

patrick.gibbs@lw.com 

matt.rawlinson@lw.com 

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 

Melanie Blunschi (Bar No. 234264) 

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 

San Francisco, California, 94111 

Telephone: +1.415.391.0600 

Facsimile: +1.415.395.8095 

melanie.blunschi@lw.com 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 

Rory P. Read, Thomas J. Seifert, 

Richard A. Bergman, and Lisa T. Su 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

BABAK HATAMIAN and LUSSA DENNJ

SALVATORE, individually and on behalf of 

all others similarly situated, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC., 

RORY P. READ, THOMAS J. SEIFERT, 

RICHARD A. BERGMAN AND LISA T. 

SU, 

 Defendants. 

CASE NO. 4:14-cv-00226-YGR

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING 

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY 

MATERIALS 

*MODIFIED BY THE COURT AT ¶ 6.3* 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 1 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 

This Stipulation and [Proposed] Protective Order Regarding Attorneys’ Eyes Only 

Materials (“AEO Order”) supplements the Stipulation Regarding Confidentiality and Protective 

Order (“Protective Order”) dated August 10, 2015 [Dkt. 136]. The AEO Order shall supersede 

the Protective Order only with respect to materials designated either “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – 

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” The Protective Order remains applicable to all other types of 

confidential materials. 

Disclosure and discovery activity in this action will 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 AEO 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 the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 

14.4, below, that this Stipulated AEO 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) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule 

of Civil Procedure 26(c). 

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

well as their support staff). 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 2 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

2.4 Designated House Counsel: House Counsel who seek access to “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” information in this matter. 

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

it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – 

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES 

ONLY.” 

2.6 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. 

2.7 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.. 

2.8 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” Information or 

Items: extremely sensitive “Confidential Information or Items,” disclosure of which to another 

Party or Non-Party would create a substantial risk of serious harm that could not be avoided by 

less restrictive means. 

2.9 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” Information 

or Items: extremely sensitive “Confidential CW Information or Items,” disclosure of which, to 

anyone other than Outside Counsel of Record in this Action, would create a substantial risk of 

serious harm that could not be avoided by less restrictive means. 

2.10 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this action. House 

Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel. 

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

entity not named as a Party to this action. 

2.12 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 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 3 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 3

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

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

that party. 

2.13 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). 

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

Material in this action. 

2.15 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. 

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

“CONFIDENTIAL,” “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” or as 

“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” 

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

Producing Party. 

3. SCOPE 

The protections conferred by this Stipulated AEO 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 Stipulated AEO Protective 

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 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 4 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 4

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

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. 

To the extent it is practical to do so, 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 at all or do not qualify for the level of protection 

initially asserted, that Designating Party must promptly notify all other parties that it is 

withdrawing the mistaken designation. In addition, the parties shall meet and confer in advance 

of any request to file documents under seal with the Court. 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 5 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 5

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

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 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or 

“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” 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) and must specify, for each portion, the level of protection 

being asserted. 

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 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – 

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES 

ONLY”). 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 protection 

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

affix the appropriate legend (“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or 

“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”) 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) and must specify, for each portion, the level of protection 

being asserted. 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 6 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 6

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

(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 and specify the level of protection being asserted. When it is 

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

appears that substantial portions of the testimony may qualify for protection, the Designating 

Party may invoke on the record (before the deposition, hearing, or other proceeding is 

concluded) a right to have up to 30 days from receipt of the final transcript to identify the 

specific portions of the testimony as to which protection is sought and to specify the level of 

protection being asserted. Only those portions of the testimony that are appropriately designated 

for protection within the 30 days shall be covered by the provisions of this Stipulated AEO 

Protective Order. Alternatively, a Designating Party may specify, at the deposition or up to 30 

days afterwards if that period is properly invoked, that the entire transcript shall be treated as 

“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL 

– CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” 

Parties shall give the other parties notice if they reasonably expect a deposition, hearing 

or other proceeding to include Protected Material so that the other parties can ensure that only 

authorized individuals who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” 

(Exhibit A) are present at those proceedings. The use of a document as an exhibit at a deposition 

shall not in any way affect its designation as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ 

EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.”

Transcripts containing Protected Material shall have an obvious legend on the title page 

that the transcript contains Protected Material, and the title page shall be followed by a list of all 

pages (including line numbers as appropriate) that have been designated as Protected Material 

and the level of protection being asserted by the Designating Party. The Designating Party shall 

inform the court reporter of these requirements. Any transcript that is prepared before the 

expiration of a 30-day period for designation shall be treated during that period as if it had been 

designated “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” in its entirety unless 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 7 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 7

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

otherwise agreed. After the expiration of that period, the transcript shall be treated only as 

actually designated.

(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 “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – 

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”. 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) 

and specify the level of protection being asserted. 

5.3 Inadvertent Failures to Designate. If timely corrected, 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. 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. 

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 is necessary to avoid foreseeable, substantial unfairness, unnecessary economic 

burdens, or a significant disruption or delay of the litigation, a Party does not waive its right to 

challenge a confidentiality designation by electing not to mount a challenge promptly after the 

original designation is disclosed. 

6.2 Meet and Confer. The Challenging Party shall initiate the dispute resolution 

process by providing written notice of each designation it is challenging and describing 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 Stipulated AEO Protective Order. 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 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 8 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 8

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

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. 

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

intervention, the parties shall follow the Court’s Standing Order in Civil Cases regarding 

Discovery and Discovery Motions. The parties may file a joint letter brief regarding retaining 

confidentiality 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. 

Failure by a Designating Party to file such discovery dispute letter within the applicable 21 or 14 

day period (set forth above) with the Court shall automatically waive the confidentiality 

designation for each challenged designation. If, after submitting a joint letter brief, the Court 

allows that a motion may be filed, any 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. The Court, in its discretion, may elect to transfer the 

discovery matter to a Magistrate Judge. 

In addition, the parties may file a joint letter brief regarding a challenge to 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. If, after submitting a joint 

letter brief, the Court allows that a motion may be filed, 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 

Court, in its discretion, may elect to refer the discovery matter to a Magistrate Judge. 

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 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 9 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 9

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

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 letter brief 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). 

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 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or 

“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” 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 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL 

– ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” only to: 

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

employees of said Outside Counsel of Record to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose the 

information for this litigation and who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be 

Bound” that is attached hereto as Exhibit A; 

(b) Designated House Counsel of the Receiving Party (1) to whom disclosure is 

reasonably necessary for this litigation, (2) who has signed the “Acknowledgment and 

Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A), and (3) as to whom the procedures set forth in paragraph 

7.4(a)(1), below, have been followed; 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 10 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 10

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

(c) Experts of the Parties (1) to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this 

litigation, (2) who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A), 

and (3) as to whom the procedures set forth in paragraph 7.4(a)(2), below, have been followed; 

(d) a mediator engaged by Counsel of Record and any staff; 

(e) the court and its personnel; 

(f) court reporters and their staff, professional jury or trial consultants, 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); and 

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

custodian or other person who otherwise possessed or knew the information. 

 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” Information 

or Items may only be disclosed to the parties identified in sections 7.2(a) and (e) of this 

Stipulated AOE Protective Order. 

7.3 Procedures for Approving or Objecting to Disclosure of “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” Information or Items to Designated House 

Counsel or Experts. 

(a)(1) Unless otherwise ordered by the court or agreed to in writing by the 

Designating Party, a Party that seeks to disclose to Designated House Counsel any information 

or item that has been designated “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” 

pursuant to paragraph 7.3(b) first must make a written request to the Designating Party that sets 

forth the full name of the Designated House Counsel and the city and state of his or her 

residence. 

(a)(2) Unless otherwise ordered by the court or agreed to in writing by the 

Designating Party, a Party that seeks to disclose to an Expert (as defined in this Order) any 

information or item that has been designated “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ 

EYES ONLY” pursuant to paragraph 7.3(c) first must make a written request to the Designating 

Party that (1) identifies the general categories of “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ 

EYES ONLY” information that the Receiving Party seeks permission to disclose to the Expert, 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 11 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 11

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

(2) sets forth the full name of the Expert and the city and state of his or her primary residence, 

(3) attaches a copy of the Expert’s current resume, (4) identifies the Expert’s current 

employer(s), (5) identifies each person or entity from whom the Expert has received 

compensation or funding for work in his or her areas of expertise or to whom the expert has 

provided professional services, including in connection with a litigation, at any time during the 

preceding five years, and (6) identifies (by name and number of the case, filing date, and location 

of court) any litigation in connection with which the Expert has offered expert testimony, 

including through a declaration, report, or testimony at a deposition or trial, during the preceding 

five years. 

(b) A Party that makes a request and provides the information specified in the 

preceding respective paragraphs may disclose the subject Protected Material to the identified 

Designated House Counsel or Expert unless, within 14 days of delivering the request, the Party 

receives a written objection from the Designating Party. Any such objection must set forth in 

detail the grounds on which it is based. 

(c) A Party that receives a timely written objection must meet and confer with the 

Designating Party (through direct voice to voice dialogue) to try to resolve the matter by 

agreement within 7 days of the written objection. If no agreement is reached, the Party seeking to 

make the disclosure to Designated House Counsel or the Expert may file a motion as provided in 

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

permission from the court to do so. Any such motion must describe the circumstances with 

specificity, set forth in detail the reasons why the disclosure to Designated House Counsel or the 

Expert is reasonably necessary, assess the risk of harm that the disclosure would entail, and 

suggest any additional means that could be used to reduce that risk. In addition, any such motion 

must be accompanied by a competent declaration describing the parties’ efforts to resolve the 

matter by agreement (i.e., the extent and the content of the meet and confer discussions) and 

setting forth the reasons advanced by the Designating Party for its refusal to approve the 

disclosure. 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 12 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 12

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

In any such proceeding, the Party opposing disclosure to Designated House Counsel or 

the Expert shall bear the burden of proving that the risk of harm that the disclosure would entail 

(under the safeguards proposed) outweighs the Receiving Party’s need to disclose the Protected 

Material to its Designated House Counsel or Expert. 

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 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL 

– ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ 

EYES ONLY” 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 Stipulated AEO Protective Order. Such notification shall include a copy of this Stipulated 

AEO 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 “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – 

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” 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. 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 13 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 13

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

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 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES 

ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” Such 

information produced by Non-Parties 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. 

(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 

Non-Party; 

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

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 

Non-Party 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. 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 14 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 14

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

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 AEO 

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. 

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 Stipulated 

AEO 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 AEO 

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 AEO Protective Order. 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 15 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 15

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

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(e) is denied by the court, then 

the Receiving Party may file the Protected Material in the public record pursuant to Civil Local 

Rule 79-5(e)(2) unless otherwise instructed by the court. 

13. FINAL DISPOSITION 

Within 60 days after the final disposition of this action, as defined in paragraph 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. 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 AEO Protective Order as set forth in Section 4 (DURATION). 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 16 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 16

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD. 

Dated: October 6, 2015 Respectfully submitted, 

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 

By: /s/ Patrick E. Gibbs 

Patrick E. Gibbs 

Attorney for Defendants ADVANCED MICRO 

DEVICES, INC., RORY P. READ, THOMAS J. 

SEIFERT, RICHARD A. BERGMAN, AND LISA T. SU 

/ / / 

Dated: October 6, 2015 Respectfully submitted, 

LABATON SUCHAROW LLP 

By: /s/ Jonathan Gardner 

Jonathan Gardner 

Attorney for Lead Plaintiffs KBC ASSET 

MANAGEMENT NV and ARKANSAS TEACHER 

RETIREMENT SYSTEM 

Dated: October 6, 2015 Respectfully submitted, 

MOTLEY RICE LLC 

By: /s/ James Hughes 

James Hughes 

Attorney for Lead Plaintiffs KBC ASSET 

MANAGEMENT NV and ARKANSAS TEACHER 

RETIREMENT SYSTEM 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 Dated: _____________ _____________________________________________ 

THE HON. YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS 

United States District Judge 

 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 17 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 17

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

Patrick E. Gibbs (Bar No. 183174) 

Matthew Rawlinson (Bar No. 231890) 

140 Scott Drive 

Menlo Park, California 94025 

Telephone: +1.650.328.4600 

Facsimile: +1.650.463.2600 

patrick.gibbs@lw.com 

matt.rawlinson@lw.com 

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 

Melanie Blunschi (Bar No. 234264) 

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 

San Francisco, California, 94111 

Telephone: +1.415.391.0600 

Facsimile: +1.415395.8095 

melanie.blunschi@lw.com 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 

Rory P. Read, Thomas J. Seifert, 

Richard A. Bergman, and Lisa T. Su 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BABAK HATAMIAN and LUSSA DENNJ 

SALVATORE, individually and on behalf of 

all others similarly situated, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC., 

RORY P. READ, THOMAS J. SEIFERT, 

RICHARD A. BERGMAN, AND LISA 

T. SU, 

 Defendants. 

CASE NO. 14-cv-00226-YGR

NON-DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE 

I certify my understanding that access to materials designated as “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – 

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” is provided to me pursuant to the terms and restriction of a 

Stipulation Protective Order Regarding Attorneys’ Eyes Only Materials entered in the abovecaptioned litigation on ________________________ (the “AEO Protective Order”). I certify 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 18 of 19
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

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SILICON VALLEY 18

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE

ORDER REGARDING AEO MATERIALS 

CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

that I have been given a copy of, and have read, the Order and agree to comply with its terms. I 

understand that the contents of any material designated “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – 

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES 

ONLY,” and any notes or other memoranda or any other forms of information which copy or 

disclose material designated “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or 

“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – CW – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” shall not be disclosed to 

anyone other than in accordance with the Order and shall be used only for the purposes set forth 

therein. 

I agree to be subject to the jurisdiction of this Court for purposes of enforcement of this 

Non-Disclosure Certificate and the Order. 

By: ____________________________________ 

Title: __________________________________ 

Representing: ___________________________ 

Date: __________________________________ 

 

Case 4:14-cv-00226-YGR Document 154 Filed 10/08/15 Page 19 of 19