Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-01524/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-01524-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal

---

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

1

STIPULATION FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT AND PROTECTIVE 

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT

Julian Burns King, SBN 298617

julian@kingsiegel.com

Rachael E. Sauer, SBN 308549

rsauer@kingsiegel.com 

KING & SIEGEL LLP

724 S. Spring Street, Suite 201

Los Angeles, CA 90014

Telephone: 213-465-4802

Facsimile: 213-465-4803

Attorneys for Plaintiff STEVE WHEAT

JAMES T. CONLEY, SBN 224174

james.conley@ogletree.com

HAIDY M. RIVERA, SBN 322117

haidy.rivera@ogletree.com

OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH,

SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.

500 Capitol Mall, Suite 2500

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: 916-840-3150

Facsimile: 916-840-3159

Attorneys for Defendant

WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVE WHEAT, an individual,

Plaintiff,

vs.

WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC., a Delaware 

Corporation, and DOES 1-10, inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:22-cv-01524-BAM

STIPULATION FOR INDEPENDENT 

MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF 

PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT AND 

[PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: 

DEFENDANT’S INDEPENDENT 

MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF 

PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT

Action Filed: October 27, 2022

Trial Date: October 7, 2024

Case 1:22-cv-01524-BAM Document 32 Filed 12/22/23 Page 1 of 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

2

STIPULATION FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT AND PROTECTIVE 

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT

WHEREAS, Defendant asserts that Plaintiff has placed his mental condition at issue in this 

litigation and as a result is entitled to a Defense Mental Examination; and

WHEREAS, Plaintiff therefore has agreed to undergo a Defense Independent Mental 

Examination subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Stipulation; and

WHEREAS, this Stipulation and Protective Order for the Defense Independent Mental 

Examination provides for the designation of certain material used in the Exam and resulting from the 

Exam to be deemed Highly Confidential, which will be subject to the concurrently filed 

STIPULATION FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE 

WHEAT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S INDEPENDENT MENTAL 

EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVEN WHEAT.

STIPULATION

NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above recitals, the Parties, through their undersigned 

counsel of record, stipulate as follows: 

1. Medical Examiner: Dr. Judy Ho, Ph.D., a qualified medical examiner (referenced 

below as the “medical examiner”), will conduct the mental examination of Plaintiff.

2. Mental Examination: Plaintiff shall submit to a mental examination before the 

medical examiner pursuant to the terms of this stipulation. 

3. Attendees: Only Plaintiff, the medical examiner, and the medical examiner’s 

psychometrician, shall be present for the mental examination. Only the medical examiner will 

conduct the clinical interview. 

4. Scope: The purpose of the mental examination is to assess Plaintiff’s claimed mental 

and emotional distress and to evaluate the nature, causes, and extent of such distress. The examiner 

may question Plaintiff about treatment sought for emotional distress and the cost of such treatment. 

The examiner will not question Plaintiff about the amount of monetary damages sought in this action.

5. Date and Location: The medical examiner will conduct the mental examination 

virtually (using HIPAA compliant zoom and secure platform for the administration of psychological 

questionnaires). If this option is chosen, the Plaintiff agrees they will physically be in the state of 

California for the telehealth evaluation, as that is the requirements of Dr. Ho’s California license to 

Case 1:22-cv-01524-BAM Document 32 Filed 12/22/23 Page 2 of 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

3

STIPULATION FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT AND PROTECTIVE 

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT

58944272.v1-OGLETREE

practice. The psychological questionnaires portion of the evaluation will be administered via a secure 

virtual platform (e.g., using HIPAA compliant zoom or the secure platform offered by the 

psychological questionnaire distributors). The Plaintiff will require a laptop or tablet for the 

evaluation, a stable Wi-Fi connection, a desk and chair to work, and a quiet room without disruption. 

6. Time of Examination: The parties will stipulate to the time for the beginning of the 

examination, and Plaintiff will appear on the agreed upon date, place, and at the examination time. 

If the exam has not commenced within 30 minutes of the agreed upon time, Plaintiff will be free to 

leave the medical examiner’s office. Similarly, if Plaintiff does not arrive within 30 minutes, Dr. Ho 

will reserve the right to cancel the evaluation day and reschedule at another time when Plaintiff can 

show up on time.

7. Duration: The mental examination shall be limited to seven (7) hours exclusive of 

breaks. Breaks for personal comfort, lunch or necessity will be permitted as needed, but will be in 

addition to the seven (7) hour duration of the mental examination and will extend the duration of the 

mental examination by the length of the breaks taken. If any period of time exceeding 30 minutes 

goes by when Plaintiff is not being examined or a test is not being administered, except during agreed 

upon breaks, then the examination is to be considered completed and Plaintiff will be free to leave.

8. Examination: The mental examination may include an interview of Plaintiff and only 

those tests identified below: 

a. Interview: The interview shall cover a variety of relevant topics, including 

background information; the reported circumstances of onset of the alleged emotional 

injury or injuries; and how those symptoms have unfolded over time to the present, 

including any other assessments, treatments, or functional impairment. Pertinent 

areas of inquiry with regard to Plaintiff’s background shall include developmental 

history, education, employment, social and marital history, legal history (such as 

disability claims, if any), general medical history, prior psychiatric history, substance 

use, and family history. The defense medical examiner will elicit from Plaintiff an 

account of the onset and course of Plaintiff’s emotional problems related to the 

alleged conduct of Defendant, culminating in a review of current psychiatric and 

Case 1:22-cv-01524-BAM Document 32 Filed 12/22/23 Page 3 of 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

4

STIPULATION FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT AND PROTECTIVE 

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT

physical complaints. The purpose of the interview is to differentiate between 

emotional complaints that may be pre-existing and unrelated to the alleged actions of 

Defendant; complaints that arose concurrently but unrelated to alleged actions of 

Defendant; complaints that arose as a result of Defendant’s alleged conduct; 

complaints that are actually due to substance use or medications; complaints that are 

due to an underlying general medical disorder; or complaints that arose subsequent to 

the alleged actions of Defendant and are unrelated to Defendant’s alleged conduct 

toward Plaintiff.

b. Testing: Testing shall be limited to: MMPI-3 (MMPI-3), Million Clinical 

Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI-IV), Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), MiniMental State Examination-2 (MMSE-2), PTSD Checklist with Life Events Checklist 

(PCL-5 with LEC-5), Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 (SCID-5), Structured 

Interview of Reported Symptoms, 2nd Edition (SIRS-2), Structured Inventory of 

Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS), Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory 

(SASSI-4), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II), 

Beck Hopelessness Inventory (BHI). 

9. No Physical Examination: The mental examination will involve no physical 

examination and involve no blood tests or other intrusive medical studies or procedures.

10. Recording: In addition to the defense medical examiner’s notes, the medical 

examiner will memorialize the clinical interview portion of the mental examination with a voicerecording, either digitally or by audiotape. This recording shall be produced to Plaintiff. Plaintiff 

may also voice-record the clinical interview portion of the mental examination. This recording shall 

be produced to Defendant. Recordings produced subject to this Section shall be deemed Highly 

Confidential, subject to the Protective Order and the restrictions set forth in paragraphs 15 and 16 

herein. Neither the defense medical examiner nor Plaintiff may videorecord any portion of the 

mental examination. The standardized assessment portions of the examination, including the 

administration of paper-and-pencil questionnaires, computerized questionnaires, and the 

administration of the semi-structured diagnostic interview (i.e., SCID 5) cannot be audio-recorded, 

Case 1:22-cv-01524-BAM Document 32 Filed 12/22/23 Page 4 of 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

5

STIPULATION FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT AND PROTECTIVE 

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT

videotaped, nor can photos be taken of the materials. These protocols constitute raw data and trade 

secrets and the defense medical examiner has ethical and legal obligations to maintain their 

confidentiality and administer these instruments with fidelity to standardized procedures.

11. Exchange of Raw Data: At the conclusion of any testing of Plaintiff by Dr. Ho, a 

copy of the actual test pages, raw data generated and all test results regarding Plaintiffs all be 

exchanged simultaneously with Plaintiff’s respective experts in the specified field of expertise, 

whose information will be provided at a subsequent time. No other individuals will be able to receive 

said raw data and test materials due to the ethical and legal obligations described in sections below. 

However, if counsel must have copies of these materials themselves, all materials will only be 

produced after a signed protective order by the court is provided according to the terms set forth in 

sections 16 and 17.

12. Fees Associated with Examination: Defendant will be responsible for all fees 

associated with this examination, including Dr. Ho’s cancellation policy.

13. No Disclosure of Insurance Information: Plaintiff will not provide the defense 

medical examiner with his medical insurance information or other insurance information.

14. Plaintiff Will Not Create Documentary Evidence: Plaintiff’s right not to create 

items of demonstrative evidence for Defendant’s use will not be violated. Therefore, Plaintiff will 

not be compelled to create any items of potential documentary evidence and will not fill out any 

charts, new patient records, forms, or histories that may be requested or provided by the defense 

medical examiner. Plaintiff will answer questions orally. Plaintiff recognizes the examiner’s need 

to obtain a relevant medical history and will answer any reasonable relevant medical history 

questions posed by the examiner. Plaintiff will not provide or create a written medical history.

PROTECTIVE ORDER

15. Confidential Nature of Examination and Reports: The tests taken by Plaintiff as 

part of the mental examination, along with any notes and/or written reports and/or records maintained 

in any format, including electronic data, by Examiner are Highly Confidential medical records 

relating to Plaintiff’s mental health. These records are Highly Confidential and their distribution 

should be subject to a protective order. Said records may be used by counsel in preparation for trial, 

Case 1:22-cv-01524-BAM Document 32 Filed 12/22/23 Page 5 of 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

6

STIPULATION FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT AND PROTECTIVE 

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT

in trial and in other proceedings in this matter, but for no other purpose. These records may not be 

used as exhibits to documents filed with the court except if filed under seal. At the conclusion of the 

litigation in this matter, whether by way of settlement or final judgment, counsel shall destroy all 

copies of Plaintiff’s mental health records in their possession, custody and control and provide 

opposing counsel with a certificate of destruction within 30 days of the conclusion of the litigation 

or appeal therefrom.

16. Production of Examiner’s Testing and Raw Data:

a. Testing and Raw Data to Mental Health Expert: The defense medical 

examiner will provide to Plaintiff’s mental health expert, as retained and designated 

by Plaintiff in writing in this action (“Plaintiff retained mental health expert”), all 

testing and raw data related to or generated by the mental examination. Similarly, 

Plaintiff’s retained mental health expert shall also disclose to the defense medical 

examiner all testing and raw data related to or generated by any mental examination 

of Plaintiff conducted by Plaintiff’s retained health expert. 

b. Production of Testing and Raw Data to Counsel: Generally, testing and raw 

data cannot be provided directly to or shared with counsel as they represent 

proprietary information or “trade secrets.” Further, they can be misinterpreted by 

people who do not have the expertise or training to analyze them, and this may bring 

emotional or other substantial harm to the plaintiff. Dr. Ho therefore has legal and 

ethical obligations to protect such materials from disclosure to individuals who are 

not trained clinical psychologists. If counsel wishes to have copies of testing and raw 

data, the materials can only be provided if they are subject to a protective order that 

designates these materials as Highly Confidential. Specific provisions include 

marking every page clearly with a Highly Confidential stamp; 2) the content of these 

records may not be used as exhibits to documents filed with the court except if filed 

under seal; 3) portions of testimony that discusses raw data and testing materials 

should be separated and designated as highly confidential; 4) at the conclusion of the 

litigation in this matter, whether by way of settlement or final judgment, counsel shall 

Case 1:22-cv-01524-BAM Document 32 Filed 12/22/23 Page 6 of 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

7

STIPULATION FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT AND PROTECTIVE 

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT

destroy all copies of all testing and raw data in their possession, custody and control 

and provide opposing counsel with a certificate of destruction within 30 days; 5) 

disclosure of testing and raw data materials should be limited to the smallest audience 

possible necessary to conduct the activities pertaining to this litigation; and 6) 

individuals who receive such information must sign Exhibit A. The criteria above will 

allow Dr. Ho to satisfy the bare minimum legal and ethical requirements Dr. Ho must 

abide by regarding the transmission of such materials. 

THEREFORE, the Parties, through this Stipulation, respectfully ask that this Court issue an 

Order according to the Parties’ Stipulation above.

DATED: December 21, 2023 KING & SIEGEL LLP

By: /s/ Rachael E. Sauer (as authorized on 12.21.23)

Julian Burns King

Rachael E. Sauer

 

Attorneys for Plaintiff STEVE WHEAT

DATED: December 21, 2023 OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, 

SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.

By: /s/ Haidy M. Rivera

James T. Conley

Haidy M. Rivera

Attorneys for Defendant 

WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC.

Case 1:22-cv-01524-BAM Document 32 Filed 12/22/23 Page 7 of 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

8

STIPULATION FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT AND PROTECTIVE 

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF STEVE WHEAT

ORDER

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the Court hereby approves this Stipulation to conduct the 

Independent Mental Examination, subject to the following correction: 

Paragraph 11, lines 4-7: At the conclusion of any testing of Plaintiff by Dr. Ho, a copy of 

the actual test pages, raw data generated and all test results regarding Plaintiff shall be exchanged 

simultaneously with Plaintiff’s respective experts in the specified field of expertise, whose 

information will be provided at a subsequent time. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Parties shall comply with the terms of the Protective 

Order set forth above.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 22, 2023 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:22-cv-01524-BAM Document 32 Filed 12/22/23 Page 8 of 8