Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00535/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00535-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 350
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 23:134 P.I.- Auto Negligence

---

1

STIPULATION AND ORDER

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

29

30

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

29

30

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHELLE TAFOYA,

 Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Defendant.

CASE NO.: 2:19-CV-00535-MCE-KJN

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE 

ORDER

Pursuant to the agreement of the parties before the Court during the informal telephonic 

discovery conference held on March 12, 2020, Plaintiff Michelle Tafoya and Defendant United 

States of America respectfully submit this stipulation and proposed protective order.

MCGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

W. DEAN CARTER

Assistant United States Attorney

501 I Street, Suite 10-100

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: (916) 554-2781

Facsimile: (916) 554-2900 

Dean.Carter@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for the United States

Case 2:19-cv-00535-JAM-KJN Document 17 Filed 03/19/20 Page 1 of 5
2

STIPULATION AND ORDER

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

29

30

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

29

30

Dated: March 13, 2020

MCGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

By: /s/ W. Dean Carter

W. DEAN CARTER

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Defendant

United States of America

Dated: March 13, 2020 DREYER BABICH BUCCOLA WOOD 

CAMPORA, LLP

By: /s/ Andrew Minney (authorized on 3/13/20) 

Andrew Minney

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Michelle Tafoya

Case 2:19-cv-00535-JAM-KJN Document 17 Filed 03/19/20 Page 2 of 5
1

STIPULATION AND ORDER

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

29

30

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

29

30

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHELLE TAFOYA,

 Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Defendant.

CASE NO.: 2:19-CV-00535-MCE-KJN

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Pursuant to the agreement of the parties before the Court during the informal telephonic 

discovery conference held on March 12, 2020, it is hereby

ORDERED that Defendant United States of America’s attorneys may communicate with 

Plaintiff Michelle Tafoya’s treating healthcare providers about any medical matter as to which 

Plaintiff waived the physician-patient privilege by filing this case – that is, information relevant to 

the causes, treatment, extent, and consequences of the injuries for which Plaintiff seeks 

compensation – and any other non-privileged information concerning Plaintiff’s health condition and 

medical history at the time of the incident; and it is further

ORDERED that each of the health care providers are authorized, but not required, by this

Protective Order to disclose to defense counsel health information that directly or indirectly relates

to the causes, treatment, extent, and consequences of the injuries that are the subject of this case. 

The health care providers may identify and refer to medical documents in the course of any

discussion with defense counsel, and they may provide such documents or copies of such documents 

to defense counsel who shall then provide a copy of such documents to Plaintiff’s counsel; and it is 

further

ORDERED that defense counsel shall provide to each health care provider this Protective 

Order and the attached Notice of Authorization to Release Medical Information sufficiently in 

Case 2:19-cv-00535-JAM-KJN Document 17 Filed 03/19/20 Page 3 of 5
2

STIPULATION AND ORDER

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

29

30

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

29

30

advance of engaging with that health care provider in any conversations pursuant to this Protective 

Order. Each health care provider may decide whether or not he or she will speak with defense 

counsel – with or without Plaintiff’s lawyer present. Defense counsel should not suggest to the 

health care provider that he or she has any obligation to speak with them, and Plaintiff’s counsel may 

not advise or encourage the health care provider not to speak with defense counsel. Each of the 

health care providers are also free to consult with his or her own attorney regarding this matter, and 

to have an attorney present during any communication with defense counsel. Each of the health care 

providers are also free to request that Plaintiff or his attorney be present at any interview with 

defense counsel; and it is further

ORDERED that any interview by Defendant shall include only one attorney representing

Defendant, such that there is no other witness to the conversation other than the questioning attorney 

and the health care provider. If the health care provider’s own counsel and/or Plaintiff or her counsel 

are present, then this restriction shall not apply; and it is further

ORDERED that Defendant, defense counsel, or any other agent of Defendant, may not use 

or disclose any health information obtained pursuant to this Protective Order for any purpose other 

than this litigation; and it is further

ORDERED that at the conclusion of this litigation, and at the written request of Plaintiff or 

his attorney, all recipients of health information obtained pursuant to this Protective Order shall

return to Plaintiff, or destroy, any and all documents containing health information obtained pursuant 

to this Protective Order, except that health information included in insurance claims and law firm 

litigation files may be retained as necessary to allow compliance with the insurance laws and the 

Rules of Professional Conduct of California.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 18, 2020

tafo.535

Case 2:19-cv-00535-JAM-KJN Document 17 Filed 03/19/20 Page 4 of 5
3

STIPULATION AND ORDER

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

29

30

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

29

30

NOTICE OF AUTHORIZATION TO RELEASE MEDICAL INFORMATION

Plaintiff, Michelle Tafoya, has sued the United States of America (hereafter “Defendant”) alleging 

injuries that resulted on March 30, 2018, as a result of a motor vehicle accident with an employee of 

the United States Air Force.

The case is now pending before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California 

(Civil Action No. 2:18-cv-00535-MCE-KJN). Counsel for the parties have stipulated to a protective 

order allowing counsel for Defendant to speak informally with health care providers who, at various 

times, were treating Plaintiff. The Court has granted this request on certain conditions.

One condition is that Defendant’s counsel must provide this notice in advance of any such 

conversations. The Court has authorized Defendant’s counsel to speak with Plaintiff’s health care 

providers if, and only if, the individual health care provider wishes to do so. If a health care provider 

chooses to speak with Defendant’s counsel, he or she may disclose to the lawyer any medical 

information about Plaintiff that could be relevant to the causes, treatment, extent, and consequences 

of the injuries of Plaintiff. The health care provider may disclose only medical information that is 

relevant, directly or indirectly, to these injuries.

The health care provider may identify and refer to specific documents in the course of any 

discussion with Defendant’s counsel, and the health care provider may provide such documents or 

copies of such documents to Defendant’s counsel. The Court has ordered Defendant’s counsel to 

keep this information confidential and to use it only in connection with this lawsuit.

The decision regarding whether to speak with Defendant’s counsel is a decision for each of 

the health care providers to make individually, and neither side in the lawsuit may try to influence 

those decisions. If any of the health care providers so desire, they are free to consult with an attorney 

regarding this matter, and they may have their attorney and Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s lawyer present for 

any discussion with Defendant’s counsel, if they wish. These decisions are also entirely up to each of 

the individual health care providers.

Case 2:19-cv-00535-JAM-KJN Document 17 Filed 03/19/20 Page 5 of 5