Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01616/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01616-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15:1681 Fair Credit Reporting 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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAXON S. PETERS, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

PNC BANK, NATIONAL 

ASSOCIATION, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-1616 TLN AC 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff and defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. have filed a stipulated 

proposed protective order. ECF No. 18. Counsel for plaintiff emailed a proposed protective 

order to Chambers, correcting most of the incorrect Local Rule references in the filed document.1 

However, the parties have not filed a corrected document with the Clerk. The court believes that 

it is the better practice to file the actual stipulated proposed order which the parties want the court 

to sign. See E.D. Cal. R. 141.1(b)(1) (proposed stipulated protective order to be submitted in 

accordance with Local Rule 143), and 143(a)(1) (stipulations shall be “filed”). 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the court does NOT APPROVE the filed 

stipulated proposed protective order (ECF No. 18), or the emailed stipulation. The parties are 

//// 

 

1

 The emailed version still relies on “Local Rule 7,” which does not exist in this court. 

Case 2:14-cv-01616-TLN-AC Document 19 Filed 02/23/15 Page 1 of 2
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

free to re-submit the stipulation and proposed order in accordance with the Local Rules. 

DATED: February 20, 2015 

Case 2:14-cv-01616-TLN-AC Document 19 Filed 02/23/15 Page 2 of 2