Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06371/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06371-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights 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

____________________________

Stipulated Order

James J. Arendt, Esq. Bar No. 142937

Michael R. Linden, Esq. Bar No. 192485

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, CHIEF JERRY DYER, SERGEANT

MICHAEL MANFREDI, OFFICER SEAN PLYMALE, OFFICER SAMMY ASHWORTH,

OFFICER BRIAN PHILLIPS, OFFICER MARCUS TAFOYA AND OFFICER ART

RODRIGUEZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO

ORLANDO JAVIER GONZALEZ,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CITY OF FRESNO, FRESNO CITY

POLICE DEPARTMENT; SGT. MICHAEL

MANFREDI; OFFICERS SEAN T.

PLYMALE, SAMMY ASHWORTH,

BRIAN PHILLIPS, MARCUS TAFOYA,

ART R. RODRIGUEZ; JERRY DYER,

Chief of the Fresno Police Department, in

Their Individual and Official Capacities; and

DOES 1-75, Inclusive,

Defendants.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. CIV-F-04-6371 OWW SMS

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: IN

CAMERA REVIEW OF PEACE OFFICER

PERSONNEL FILES;

ORDER

Trial: August 1, 2006

WHEREAS, plaintiff has sought discovery of the personnel files of defendants,

SERGEANT MICHAEL MANFREDI, OFFICER SEAN PLYMALE, OFFICER MARCUS

TAFOYA and OFFICER ART RODRIGUEZ, which has been objected to by defendants on various

grounds, 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by, among and between the parties hereto through their

counsel of record that the personnel files of defendants, SERGEANT MICHAEL MANFREDI,

Case 1:04-cv-06371-OWW -SMS Document 23 Filed 01/25/06 Page 1 of 3
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 Order 2

OFFICER SEAN PLYMALE, OFFICER MARCUSTAFOYAandOFFICERART RODRIGUEZ,

will be provided to the Court for an in camera review. The Court will review the records and notify

defense counsel (under seal) of the Court’s intentions with respect to the production of documents

it deems discoverable pursuant to applicable case and statutory law. Defense counsel will have 3

court days from notification to lodge any objections or requests for modification (under seal) of the

Court’s order. The Court will then issue its final ruling.

Any records subsequently produced are subject to the following Protective Order:

1. The disclosed documents shall be used solely in connection with the civil case of

Orlando Gonzalez v. City of Fresno, et al., filed in the United States District Court, Eastern District

of California, Case No. CIV-F-04-6371 OWW SMS, in the preparation and trial of this case, or any

related proceeding, and not for any other purpose or in any other litigation. 

2. The documents may only be disclosed to the following persons:

a) Counsel for the parties to this action;

b) Paralegal, clerical, and secretarial personnel regularly employed by counsel

referred to in subpart (a) directly above, including stenographic deposition reporters retained in

connection with this action;

c) Court personnel including stenographic reporters engaged in proceedings as

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

d) Any expert or consultant retained in connection with this action;

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

motions and objections of counsel. 

3. To the extent that any pleading, exhibit or other document contains any documents

subject to this Protective Order (or information taken from any documents subject to this Protective

Order), is to be filed with the Court, the party making such a filing shall designate the material for

filing under seal, and all copies shall be kept in confidence as provided in this Protective Order by

any party on whom the filing is served.

4. This Protective Order is without prejudice to the right of any party to oppose

production or inadmissibility of documents or information for any legal reason.

Case 1:04-cv-06371-OWW -SMS Document 23 Filed 01/25/06 Page 2 of 3
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 Order 3

5. Each person to whom disclosure is made with the exception of counsel, who are

presumed to know the contents of this Protective Order shall, prior to the time of disclosure, be

provided by the person furnishing him or her such material, a copy of the Protective Order. Each

person to whom disclosure is made shall agree on the record or in writing that he/she has read the

Protective Order and 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, Eastern District of

California, with respect to any proceeding related to enforcement of this Protective Order, including

without limitation, any proceeding for contempt. Provisions of this Protective Order, insofar as they

restrict disclosure and use of the material, shall be in effect until further order of this Court. 

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

reproduced, containing information received pursuant to the provisions of this Protective Order will

remain under seal. All parties also ensure that all persons to whom documents subject to this

Protective Order were disclosed shall return all such documents to the producing party. The

conclusion of this litigation means a 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 copies made, shall be destroyed, or tendered

back to the attorneys for defendants, CITY OF FRESNO, et al.

DATED: January 20, 2006

WEAKLEY, RATLIFF, ARENDT & McGUIRE, LLP

By: /s/ James J. Arendt 

James J. Arendt

Attorneys of Defendants, City of Fresno, et al.

DATED: January 20, 2006

LAW OFFICE OF JACOB M. WEISBERG

By: /s/ Jacob M. Weisburg 

Jacob M. Weisberg

Attorney for Plaintiff Orlando Gonzales

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 24, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06371-OWW -SMS Document 23 Filed 01/25/06 Page 3 of 3