Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04435/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04435-35/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange 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

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY

ORDER, CASE NO. C 06-04435 CRB

RICHARD MARMARO (Bar No. 91387)

rmarmaro@skadden.com

JACK P. DICANIO (Bar No. 138782)

jdicanio@skadden.com

RONDA J. MCKAIG (Bar No. 216267)

rmckaig@skadden.com

SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP

300 South Grand Avenue

Los Angeles, California 90071-3144

Tel: (213) 687-5000

Fax: (213) 687-5600

Attorneys for Defendant Gregory L. Reyes

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

GREGORY L. REYES, STEPHANIE JENSEN

and ANTONIO CANOVA

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO.: C 06-04435 CRB

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

MICHAEL BYRD

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case 3:06-cv-04435-CRB Document 358 Filed 10/24/07 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

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY

ORDER, CASE NO. C 06-04435 CRB

-1-

In order to protect the confidentiality of confidential information subpoenaed by plaintiff

Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission") in this case, the Commission,

defendant Gregory L. Reyes ("Reyes"), defendant Stephanie Jensen ("Jensen"), defendant

Antonio Canova ("Canova"), defendant Michael Byrd ("Byrd"), third party Brocade

Communications Systems, Inc. ("Brocade"), and the United States Attorney's Office hereby

agree as follows:

1. 5H\HVPD\GHVLJQDWHDV3FRQILGHQWLDO ́E\VWDPSLQJWKHUHOHYDQWSDJHRUDV

otherwise set forth herein) any document or response to a subpoena which he considers in good

faith to: (i) contain information involving trade secrets, or confidential business or financial

information, subject to protection under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or California law;

or (ii) contain confidential information of a person that is protected by a right of privacy under

applicable law. Where a document or response consists of more than one page, the first page and

each page on which confidential information appears shall be so designated.

2. Reyes may designate information disclosed during a dHSRVLWLRQDV3FRQILGHQWLDO ́

by so indicating on the record at the deposition and requesting the preparation of a separate

transcript of such material. Additionally, Reyes may designate in writing, within twenty (20)

days after receipt of the deposition transcript for which the designation is proposed, that specific

pages of the transcript be treated as "confidential" information. Any party may object to such

proposal, in writing or on the record. Upon such objection, the procedures described in

paragraph 7 below shall be followed. After any designation made according to the procedure set

forth in this paragraph, the designated documents or information shall be treated according to the

designation until the matter is resolved according to the procedures described in paragraph 7

below.

3. All information produced by Reyes to the Commission, Jensen, Canova or Byrd

in the course of this case (other than information that is publicly available) shall be used solely

for the purpose of this case and any related criminal or civil proceedings currently pending ("the

Litigation").

Case 3:06-cv-04435-CRB Document 358 Filed 10/24/07 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

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY

ORDER, CASE NO. C 06-04435 CRB

-2-

4. Except with the prior written consent of Reyes, or upon prior order of this Court

obtained upon notice to Reyes, anything designated as confidential pursuant to the terms of this

Order (3&RQILGHQWLDO,QIRUPDWLRQ ́VKDOOQRWEHGLVFORVHGWRDQ\SHUVRQRWKHUWKDQ

(a) counsel for the respective parties to this litigation who have agreed to be

bound by the terms of this Order;

(b) employees of such counsel;

(c) individual defendants, to the extent deemed necessary by counsel for the

prosecution or defense of the Litigation;

(d) consultants or expert witnesses retained for the prosecution or defense of

the Litigation, provided that each such person shall execute a copy of the

Certification annexed to this Order (which shall be retained by counsel to

the party so disclosing the Confidential Information and made available

for inspection during the pendency or after the termination of the action

upon good cause shown and upon order of the Court) before being shown

or given any Confidential Information; and provided that if the party

chooses a consultant or expert employed by one of Brocade's competitors

or customers, the party shall notify Reyes and Brocade before disclosing

any Confidential Information to that individual and shall give Reyes and

Brocade an opportunity to move for a protective order preventing or

limiting such disclosure; Brocade and Reyes agree to keep the identity of

the consultant or expert witness confidential;

(e) any authors or recipients of the Confidential Information;

(f) the Court, Court personnel, court reporters, and jurors (subject to

subdivision (h) below); and

(g) witnesses, at deposition and/or trial, only to the extent necessary to give

their testimony. At the request of any party, the portion of the transcript

involving the Confidential Information shall be designated "Confidential"

pursuant to paragraph 2 above. Witnesses shown Confidential

Case 3:06-cv-04435-CRB Document 358 Filed 10/24/07 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

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY

ORDER, CASE NO. C 06-04435 CRB

-3-

Information shall not be allowed to retain copies.

(h) following review and approval by counsel for Reyes, individuals present

in the public courtroom during a trial conducted as part of the Litigation,

through the display of such information on a monitor, screen, or other

audio-visual equipment, if admitted as an exhibit at trial.

5. Any persons receiving Confidential Information shall not reveal or discuss such

information to or with any person who is not entitled to receive such information, except as set

forth herein, or as otherwise required by law.

6. For all requests to file under seal any Confidential Information protected under

this Order, the parties to this Order shall comply with N.D. Cal. Civil Local Rule 79-5, and in

particular subsection (d) of that rule. In the event the Court denies a request to file under seal

any Confidential Information protected under this Order, then the filing party shall, not later than

the next business day, provide Reyes and Brocade with written notice identifying which

information and/or documents the party attempted to file. Reyes and Brocade may then object to

the public filing of the Confidential Information within the three-day period provided for under

Local Rule 79-5(e). This procedure shall not affect any Court order or scheduling provisions in

Local Rule 79-5.

7. If a party contends that any material is not entitled to confidential treatment, such

party may at any time give written notice to Reyes. Reyes shall have twenty-five (25) days from

the receipt of such written notice to apply to the Court for an order designating the material as

confidential.

8. Notwithstanding any challenge to the designation of material as Confidential

Information, all documents designated as confidential shall be treated as such and shall be

subject to the provisions hereof unless and until one of the following occurs:

(a) Reyes withdraws such designation in writing; or

(b) Reyes fails to apply to the Court for an order designating the material

confidential within the time period specified above after receipt of a

written challenge to such designation; or

Case 3:06-cv-04435-CRB Document 358 Filed 10/24/07 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

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY

ORDER, CASE NO. C 06-04435 CRB

-4-

(c) the Court rules the material is not Confidential Information.

9. All provisions of this Order restricting the communication or use of Confidential

Information shall continue to be binding after the conclusion of this action, unless otherwise

agreed or ordered. Upon conclusion of the Litigation, the producing party may request that any

signatory to this agreement, other than the Commission, that has Confidential Information, other

than information contained in pleadings, correspondence and transcripts, shall either (a) return

such documents to counsel for the producing party no later than thirty (30) days after a request

by such counsel, or (b) destroy such documents within ninety (90) days following the conclusion

of this action and all appeals and certify in writing within thirty (30) days following destruction

that the documents have been destroyed. The receiving party shall elect to either return or

destroy the documents. If requested to return Confidential Information at the conclusion of the

Litigation, the Commission agrees to do so to the extent permitted by law and regulation.

10. If confidential information is inadvertently produced without marking it as such, it

may be disclosed to others until the receiving party becomes aware of the error. As soon as the

receiving party becomes aware of the inadvertent production, the information must be treated as

though it had been timely designated under this Confidentiality Order, and the receiving party

must endeavor in good faith to obtain all copies of the documents that it distributed or disclosed

to persons not authorized by Paragraph 4 herein, as well as any copies made by such persons.

11. Nothing herein shall be deemed to waive any applicable privilege or work product

protection, or to affect the ability of a party to seek relief for an inadvertent disclosure of material

protected by privilege or work product protection.

12. This Order shall not apply to or affect the use of information already in the

possession of a party or obtained by a party outside the course of discovery in this litigation.

///

///

///

///

///

Case 3:06-cv-04435-CRB Document 358 Filed 10/24/07 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

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY

ORDER, CASE NO. C 06-04435 CRB

-5-

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: October 23, 2007 SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION

By: /s/ Susan Fleischmann

Susan Fleischmann

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Securities & Exchange Commission

Dated: October 23, 2007 SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER &

FLOM LLP

By: /s/ Jack DiCanio

Jack DiCanio

Attorneys for Defendant

Gregory L. Reyes

Dated: October 23, 2007 KEKER & VAN NEST LLP

By: /s/ Laurie Mims

Laurie Mims

Attorneys for Defendant

Stephanie Jensen

Dated: October 23, 2007 HELLER EHRMAN WHITE & McAULIFFE

LLP

By /s/ Alexander Lyon

Alexander Lyon

Attorneys for Defendant

Antonio Canova

Case 3:06-cv-04435-CRB Document 358 Filed 10/24/07 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

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY

ORDER, CASE NO. C 06-04435 CRB

-6-

Dated: October 23, 2007 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART OLIVER &

HEDGES LLP

By: /s/ Patrick Doolittle

Patrick Doolittle

Attorneys for Defendant

Michael Byrd

Dated: October 23, 2007 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

By: /s/ Tim Crudo

Tim Crudo

Attorneys for the United States of America

Dated: October 23, 2007 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI

LLP

By: /s/ Caz Hashemi

Caz Hashemi

Attorneys for Third Party

Brocade Communications Systems, Inc.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

For good cause shown, provided that all requests to file any material under seal comport

with Local Rule 79-5, THE FOREGOING STIPULATION IS APPROVED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

The Honorable Charles R. Breyer

United States District Judge

October 24, 2007

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Charles R. Breyer

Case 3:06-cv-04435-CRB Document 358 Filed 10/24/07 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

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY

ORDER, CASE NO. C 06-04435 CRB

-7-

APPENDIX A

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify my understanding that Confidential Information is being provided to me

pursuant to the terms and restrictions of the Confidentiality Stipulation and Order dated

_______________________ in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Gregory L. Reyes,

Stephanie Jensen, Antonio Canova, Case No. C 06-04435 CRB (N.D. Cal.) and Securities and

Exchange Commission v. Michael Byrd, Case No. C 06-04435 CRB (N.D. Cal.). I have been

given a copy of that Order and read it. I agree to be bound by the Order. I will not reveal the

Confidential Information to anyone, except as allowed by the Order. I will maintain all such

Confidential Information -- including copies, notes or other transcriptions made therefrom -- in a

secure manner to prevent unauthorized access to it. No later than thirty (30) days after the

conclusion of this action, I will return the Confidential Information -- including copies, notes or

other transcriptions made therefrom -- to the counsel who provided me with the Confidential

Information. I hereby consent to the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the

Northern District of California for the purpose of enforcing the Confidentiality Order.

SIGNATURE:

DATED:

Case 3:06-cv-04435-CRB Document 358 Filed 10/24/07 Page 8 of 8