Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01231/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01231-5/pdf.json

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

---

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

____________________________

Stipulated Protective Order - Discovery

Rosemary T. McGuire, Esq. Bar No. 172549

Erica M. Camarena, Esq. Bar No. 227981

THE LAW FIRM OF

WEAKLEY, RATLIFF,

ARENDT & McGUIRE, LLP

1630 East Shaw Avenue, Suite 176

Fresno, California 93710

Telephone: (559) 221-5256

Facsimile: (559) 221-5262

Attorneys for Defendants, CITY OF FRESNO; JERRY DYER; REYNAUD WALLACE, 

RICHARD NADEAU; RICK DANA HARRELL 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

STEPHEN SALVADORE GAMBOA,

MARIA “TERESA” HELE, RUBEN

CARLOS JIMENEZ, SHAWN M.

PUTNAM, MICHAEL BECKER, FRESNO

VOICES FOR ANIMALS, 

Plaintiffs,

vs.

CITY OF FRESNO; JERRY DYER,

individually and in his official capacity as the

Chief of Police for the City of Fresno;

REYNAUD WALLACE, individually and in

his official capacity as an employee of the

Fresno Police Department; SMG

CORPORATION; MARIA PHEL;

RICHARD NADEAU, individually and in

his official capacity as a Fresno City Police

Officer; RICK DANA HARRELL,

individually and in his official capacity as a

Fresno City Police Officer; DOES 1-50,

Defendants.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 1:06 cv 01231 AWI SMS

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

AUTHORIZING LIMITED DISCLOSURE

CONFIDENTIAL FRESNO POLICE

DEPARTMENT RECORDS 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between the parties, through their respective counsel,

and ordered by this Court, that the following material will be disclosed pursuant to this

Case 1:06-cv-01231-AWI -SMS Document 34 Filed 01/04/08 Page 1 of 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

____________________________

Stipulated Protective Order - Discovery 2

stipulation and protective order:

1. Relevant Fresno Police Department’s Standing Orders in effect in July of

2005;

2. Employment evaluations regarding Officers Reynaud Wallace, Richard

Nadeau and Rick Harrell from January 1, 2000 to July 31, 2005;

3. Training Activity Record for Officers Reynaud Wallace, Richard Nadeau

and Rick Harrell; and

4. Internal Affairs Investigation File excluding Exhibits 12, 13, and 14. 

The above-named documents which are maintained by the Fresno City Police

Department and requested by plaintiffs through discovery, may be disclosed to counsel for the

parties pursuant to the protective order detailed below. The documents requested by plaintiffs

contain information which the CITY OF FRESNO deems confidential. The release of these

documents pursuant to this Stipulation and Protective Order does not waive the confidentiality

privilege protecting the above-named documents from general disclosure.

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED:

1. The “Confidential” documents shall be used solely in connection with this

litigation in the preparation and trial of this case, or any related proceeding, and not for any

other purpose or in any other litigation. The party producing the documents and materials

described above may designate those materials by affixing a mark labeling them as

“Confidential - Subject to Protective Order.” If any “confidential” materials cannot be labeled

with the aforementioned marking, those materials shall be placed in a sealed envelope or other

container that is in turn marked “Confidential - Subject to Protective Order” in a manner agreed

upon by the disclosing and requesting parties.

2. The documents identified in this protective order may be disclosed only to the

following persons: 

a) the counsel for any party to this action;

b) paralegal, stenographic, clerical, and secretarial personnel regularly employed

by counsel referred to in (a); 

Case 1:06-cv-01231-AWI -SMS Document 34 Filed 01/04/08 Page 2 of 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

____________________________

Stipulated Protective Order - Discovery 3

c) court personnel including stenographic reporters engaged in proceedings as

are necessarily incidental to preparation for the trial of this action; 

d) any outside expert or consultant retained in connection with this action and

not otherwise employed by either party;

e) any in-house expert designated by defendants to testify at trial in this matter;

f) witnesses other than the plaintiff herein, may have the information disclosed

to them during deposition proceedings; the witnesses shall be bound by the provisions of

paragraph 3;

g) the finder of fact at the time of trial subject to the court’s rulings on in limine

motions and objections of counsel;

3. Each person to whom the “confidential” documents or any portion thereof are

provided, with the exception of counsel who are presumed to know of the contents of this

protective order shall, prior to the time of disclosure, be provided by the person furnishing

him/her such information, a copy of this order, and shall agree on the record or in writing that

he/she has read the protective order and that he/she understands the provisions of the protective

order. Such person must also consent to be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States

District Court for the Eastern District of California with respect to any proceeding related to

enforcement of this order, including without limitation, any proceeding for contempt. Plaintiffs’

counsel shall be responsible for internally tracking the identities of those individuals to whom

copies of documents marked “Confidential” are given. The defendants may not request the

identities of said individuals, however, until the final termination of the litigation or if it is able

to demonstrate a good faith basis that Plaintiffs, or an agent thereof, has breached the Stipulated

Protective Order. Provisions of this order insofar as they restrict disclosure and use of the

material shall be in effect until further order of this Court. 

4. Any document filed with the Court that includes the confidential documents shall

be filed under sealed label with a cover sheet as follows: "This document is subject to a

protective order issued by the Court and may not be copied or examined except in compliance

with that order." Such documents shall be kept by the Court under seal and made available only

Case 1:06-cv-01231-AWI -SMS Document 34 Filed 01/04/08 Page 3 of 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

____________________________

Stipulated Protective Order - Discovery 4

to the Court or counsel.

5. Should any information designated confidential be disclosed, through

inadvertence or otherwise, to any person not authorized to receive it under this Protective Order,

the disclosing person(s) shall promptly (a) inform the CITY OF FRESNO of the recipient(s) and

the circumstances of the unauthorized disclosure to the relevant producing person(s) and (b) use

best efforts to bind the recipient(s) to the terms of this Protective Order. No information shall

lose its confidential status because it was disclosed to a person not authorized to receive it

under this Protective Order.

6. After the conclusion of this litigation, all documents, in whatever form stored or

reproduced, containing “confidential” information will remain confidential, and if filed with the

Court, shall remain under seal. All parties also ensure that all persons to whom “confidential”

documents were disclosed shall be returned to counsel for the producing party. The conclusion

of this litigation means termination of the case following applicable post-trial motions, appeal

and/or retrial. After the conclusion of this litigation, all confidential documents received under

the provisions of this Protective Order, including all copies made, shall be tendered back to the

attorneys for the CITY OF FRESNO in a manner in which the CITY will be able to reasonably

identify that all documents were returned.

IT IS SO STIPULATED:

Dated: December 21, 2007

WEAKLEY, RATLIFF, ARENDT & McGUIRE, LLP

By: /s Rosemary T. McGuire 

ROSEMARY T. MCGUIRE

Attorney for Defendants CITY OF FRESNO

JERRY DYER, REYNAUD WALLACE, RICHARD

NADEAU and RICK DANA HARRELL 

Case 1:06-cv-01231-AWI -SMS Document 34 Filed 01/04/08 Page 4 of 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

____________________________

Stipulated Protective Order - Discovery 5

Dated:December 17, 2007

BAKER, MANOCK & JENSEN

By: /s/ Gary T. Lento 

GARY N. LENTO

Attorneys for Defendants SMG, a Pennsylvania general

partnership (incorrectly named as SMG Corporation,)

THERESA KRAUS (incorrectly named as TERESA

KRAUS,) and MARIA PEHL (incorrectly named as

MARIA PHEL) 

Dated: December 14, 2007

By: /s/ Robert Navarro 

ROBERT NAVARRO

Attorney for Plaintiffs STEPHEN SALVADORE

GAMBOA; MARIA “TERESA” HELE; RUBEN

CARLOS JIMENEZ; SHAWN M. PUTNAM;

MICHAEL BECKER; FRESNO VOICES FOR

ANIMALS

Dated: December 14, 2007

By: /s/ Catherine Campbell 

CATHERINE CAMPBELL

Attorney for Plaintiffs STEPHEN SALVADORE

GAMBOA; MARIA “TERESA” HELE; RUBEN

CARLOS JIMENEZ; SHAWN M. PUTNAM;

MICHAEL BECKER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 4, 2008 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01231-AWI -SMS Document 34 Filed 01/04/08 Page 5 of 5