Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-07661/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-07661-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 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 PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

Gregory M. Fox, State Bar No. 070876 

Joanne Tran, State Bar No. 294402 

BERTRAND, FOX, ELLIOT, OSMAN & WENZEL 

The Waterfront Building 

2749 Hyde Street 

San Francisco, California 94109 

Telephone: (415) 353-0999 

Facsimile: (415) 353-0990 

Email: gfox@bfesf.com

jtran@bfesf.com

Attorneys for Defendants 

CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, 

ROHNERT PARK DEPARTMENT 

OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DAVID 

SUTTER, and BRIAN MASTERSON 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

HUEDELL FREEMAN, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, a government 

agency, ROHNERT PARK DEPARTMENT 

OF PUBLIC SAFETY; a government agency, 

BRANDON “JACY” TATUM, an individual; 

JOSEPH HUFFAKER, an individual; DAVID 

SUTTER, an individual; BRIAN 

MASTERSON an individual; and DOES 1-25 

inclusive, 

Defendants. 

Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 1 of 14
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 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

Plaintiff HUEDELL FREEMAN (“FREEMAN”), Defendant CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, 

(“CITY”), Defendant ROHNERT PARK DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY (“RPDPS”),

Defendant DAVID SUTTER (“SUTTER”), Defendant BRIAN MASTERSON (“MASTERSON”), 

Defendant BRANDON “JACY” TATUM (“TATUM”), Defendant JOSEPH HUFFAKER 

(“HUFFAKER”), hereby stipulate to the following proposed protective order, which is based, with no 

deviations, on the Northern District’s model protective order for standard litigation.

1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 

 Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to involve production of confidential, 

proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for 

any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby 

stipulate to and petition the court to enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties 

acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to 

discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited 

information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The 

parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does 

not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the 

procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission 

from the court to file material under seal. 

2. DEFINITIONS 

2.1 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of information or 

items under this Order. 

2.2 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is generated, 

stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

26(c). 

2.3 Counsel (without qualifier): Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as 

their support staff). 

2.4 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that it 

produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL.”

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 2 of 14
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 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

2.5 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium or 

manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, 

transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery 

in this matter. 

2.6 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to the 

litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a consultant 

in this action. 

2.7 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this action. House Counsel 

does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel. 

2.8 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity 

not named as a Party to this action. 

2.9 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a party to this action but 

are retained to represent or advise a party to this action and have appeared in this action on behalf of that 

party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on behalf of that party. 

2.10 Party: any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, 

consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staffs). 

2.11 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery Material in 

this action. 

2.12 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services (e.g., 

photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or 

retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors. 

2.13 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as 

“CONFIDENTIAL.”

2.14 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a Producing 

Party. 

3. SCOPE 

 The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material (as 

defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, 

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 3 of 14
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

3 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or 

presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. However, the protections 

conferred by this Stipulation and Order do not cover the following information: (a) any information that 

is in the public domain at the time of disclosure to a Receiving Party or becomes part of the public 

domain after its disclosure to a Receiving Party as a result of publication not involving a violation of this 

Order, including becoming part of the public record through trial or otherwise; and (b) any information 

known to the Receiving Party prior to the disclosure or obtained by the Receiving Party after the 

disclosure from a source who obtained the information lawfully and under no obligation of 

confidentiality to the Designating Party. Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by a 

separate agreement or order. 

4. DURATION 

Even after final disposition of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations imposed by this Order 

shall remain in effect until a Designating Party agrees otherwise in writing or a court order otherwise 

directs. Final disposition shall be deemed to be the later of (1) dismissal of all claims and defenses in this 

action, with or without prejudice; and (2) final judgment herein after the completion and exhaustion of all 

appeals, rehearings, remands, trials, or reviews of this action, including the time limits for filing any 

motions or applications for extension of time pursuant to applicable law. 

5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL 

5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection. Each Party or NonParty that designates information or items for protection under this Order must take care to limit any such 

designation to specific material that qualifies under the appropriate standards. The Designating Party 

must designate for protection only those parts of material, documents, items, or oral or written 

communications that qualify – so that other portions of the material, documents, items, or 

communications for which protection is not warranted are not swept unjustifiably within the ambit of this 

Order. 

 Mass, indiscriminate, or routinized designations are prohibited. Designations that are shown to be 

clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper purpose (e.g., to unnecessarily encumber or 

retard the case development process or to impose unnecessary expenses and burdens on other parties) 

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 4 of 14
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

4 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

expose the Designating Party to sanctions. 

If it comes to a Designating Party’s attention that information or items that it designated for 

protection do not qualify for protection, that Designating Party must promptly notify all other Parties that 

it is withdrawing the mistaken designation. 

5.2 Manner and Timing of Designations. Except as otherwise provided in this Order (see, e.g., 

second paragraph of section 5.2(a) below), or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, Disclosure or Discovery 

Material that qualifies for protection under this Order must be clearly so designated before the material is 

disclosed or produced. 

Designation in conformity with this Order requires: 

(a) for information in documentary form (e.g., paper or electronic documents, but excluding 

transcripts of depositions or other pretrial or trial proceedings), that the Producing Party affix the legend 

“CONFIDENTIAL” to each page that contains protected material. If only a portion or portions of the 

material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 

portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 

A Party or Non-Party that makes original documents or materials available for inspection need not 

designate them for protection until after the inspecting Party has indicated which material it would like 

copied and produced. During the inspection and before the designation, all of the material made available 

for inspection shall be deemed “CONFIDENTIAL.” After the inspecting Party has identified the 

documents it wants copied and produced, the Producing Party must determine which documents, or 

portions thereof, qualify for protection under this Order. Then, before producing the specified documents, 

the Producing Party must affix the “CONFIDENTIAL” legend to each page that contains Protected 

Material. If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 

Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 

margins). 

(b) for testimony given in deposition or in other pretrial or trial proceedings, that the 

Designating Party identify on the record, before the close of the deposition, hearing, or other proceeding, 

all protected testimony. 

(c) for information produced in some form other than documentary and for any other tangible 

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 5 of 14
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

5 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

items, that the Producing Party affix in a prominent place on the exterior of the container or containers in 

which the information or item is stored the legend “CONFIDENTIAL.” If only a portion or portions of 

the information or item warrant protection, the Producing Party, to the extent practicable, shall identify 

the protected portion(s). 

5.3 Inadvertent Failures to Designate. If timely corrected, an inadvertent failure to designate 

qualified information or items does not, standing alone, waive the Designating Party’s right to secure 

protection under this Order for such material. Upon timely correction of a designation, the Receiving 

Party must make reasonable efforts to assure that the material is treated in accordance with the provisions 

of this Order. 

6. CHALLENGING CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS 

6.1 Timing of Challenges. Any Party or Non-Party may challenge a designation of 

confidentiality at any time. Unless a prompt challenge to a Designating Party’s confidentiality 

designation is necessary to avoid foreseeable, substantial unfairness, unnecessary economic burdens, or a 

significant disruption or delay of the litigation, a Party does not waive its right to challenge a 

confidentiality designation by electing not to mount a challenge promptly after the original designation is 

disclosed. 

6.2 Meet and Confer. The Challenging Party shall initiate the dispute resolution process by 

providing written notice of each designation it is challenging and describing the basis for each challenge. 

To avoid ambiguity as to whether a challenge has been made, the written notice must recite that the 

challenge to confidentiality is being made in accordance with this specific paragraph of the Protective 

Order. The parties shall attempt to resolve each challenge in good faith and must begin the process by 

conferring directly (in voice to voice dialogue; other forms of communication are not sufficient) within 

14 days of the date of service of notice. In conferring, the Challenging Party must explain the basis for its 

belief that the confidentiality designation was not proper and must give the Designating Party an 

opportunity to review the designated material, to reconsider the circumstances, and, if no change in 

designation is offered, to explain the basis for the chosen designation. A Challenging Party may proceed 

to the next stage of the challenge process only if it has engaged in this meet and confer process first or 

establishes that the Designating Party is unwilling to participate in the meet and confer process in a 

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 6 of 14
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

6 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

timely manner. 

6.3 Judicial Intervention. If the Parties cannot resolve a challenge without court intervention, 

the Designating Party shall file and serve a motion to retain confidentiality under Civil Local Rule 7 (and 

in compliance with Civil Local Rule 79-5, if applicable) within 21 days of the initial notice of challenge 

or within 14 days of the parties agreeing that the meet and confer process will not resolve their dispute, 

whichever is earlier. Each such motion must be accompanied by a competent declaration affirming that 

the movant has complied with the meet and confer requirements imposed in the preceding paragraph. 

Failure by the Designating Party to make such a motion including the required declaration within 21 days 

(or 14 days, if applicable) shall automatically waive the confidentiality designation for each challenged 

designation. In addition, the Challenging Party may file a motion challenging a confidentiality 

designation at any time if there is good cause for doing so, including a challenge to the designation of a 

deposition transcript or any portions thereof. Any motion brought pursuant to this provision must be 

accompanied by a competent declaration affirming that the movant has complied with the meet and 

confer requirements imposed by the preceding paragraph. The burden of persuasion in any such 

challenge proceeding shall be on the Designating Party. Frivolous challenges, and those made for an 

improper purpose (e.g., to harass or impose unnecessary expenses and burdens on other parties) may 

expose the Challenging Party to sanctions. Unless the Designating Party has waived the confidentiality 

designation by failing to file a motion to retain confidentiality as described above, all parties shall 

continue to afford the material in question the level of protection to which it is entitled under the 

Producing Party’s designation until the court rules on the challenge.

7. ACCESS TO AND USE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL 

7.1 Basic Principles. A Receiving Party may use Protected Material that is disclosed or 

produced by another Party or by a Non-Party in connection with this case only for prosecuting, 

defending, or attempting to settle this litigation. Such Protected Material may be disclosed only to the 

categories of persons and under the conditions described in this Order. When the litigation has been 

terminated, a Receiving Party must comply with the provisions of section 13 below (FINAL 

DISPOSITION). 

Protected Material must be stored and maintained by a Receiving Party at a location and in a 

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 7 of 14
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

7 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

secure manner that ensures that access is limited to the persons authorized under this Order. 

7.2 Disclosure of “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items. Unless otherwise ordered by the 

court or permitted in writing by the Designating Party, a Receiving Party may disclose any information 

or item designated “CONFIDENTIAL” only to:

(a) the Receiving Party’s Outside Counsel of Record in this action, as well as employees of 

said Outside Counsel of Record to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose the information for this 

litigation and who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” that is attached 

hereto as Exhibit A; 

(b) the officers, directors, and employees (including House Counsel) of the Receiving Party to 

whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this litigation and who have signed the “Acknowledgment 

and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A);

(c) Experts (as defined in this Order) of the Receiving Party to whom disclosure is reasonably 

necessary for this litigation and who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” 

(Exhibit A); 

(d) the court and its personnel; 

(e) court reporters and their staff, professional jury or trial consultants, mock jurors, and 

Professional Vendors to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this litigation and who have signed 

the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A);

(f) during their depositions, witnesses in the action to whom disclosure is reasonably 

necessary and who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A), unless 

otherwise agreed by the Designating Party or ordered by the court. Pages of transcribed deposition 

testimony or exhibits to depositions that reveal Protected Material must be separately bound by the court 

reporter and may not be disclosed to anyone except as permitted under this Stipulated Protective Order. 

(g) the author or recipient of a document containing the information or a custodian or other 

person who otherwise possessed or knew the information. 

8. PROTECTED MATERIAL SUBPOENAED OR ORDERED PRODUCED IN OTHER 

LITIGATION 

If a Party is served with a subpoena or a court order issued in other litigation that compels 

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 8 of 14
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

8 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

disclosure of any information or items designated in this action as “CONFIDENTIAL,” that Party must: 

(a) promptly notify in writing the Designating Party. Such notification shall include a copy of 

the subpoena or court order; 

(b) promptly notify in writing the party who caused the subpoena or order to issue in the other 

litigation that some or all of the material covered by the subpoena or order is subject to this Protective 

Order. Such notification shall include a copy of this Stipulated Protective Order; and 

(c) cooperate with respect to all reasonable procedures sought to be pursued by the 

Designating Party whose Protected Material may be affected. 

If the Designating Party timely seeks a protective order, the Party served with the subpoena or 

court order shall not produce any information designated in this action as “CONFIDENTIAL” before a 

determination by the court from which the subpoena or order issued, unless the Party has obtained the 

Designating Party’s permission. The Designating Party shall bear the burden and expense of seeking 

protection in that court of its confidential material – and nothing in these provisions should be construed 

as authorizing or encouraging a Receiving Party in this action to disobey a lawful directive from another 

court. 

9. A NON-PARTY’S PROTECTED MATERIAL SOUGHT TO BE PRODUCED IN THIS 

LITIGATION 

(a) The terms of this Order are applicable to information produced by a Non-Party in this 

action and designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.” Such information produced by Non-Parties in connection 

with this litigation is protected by the remedies and relief provided by this Order. Nothing in these 

provisions should be construed as prohibiting a Non-Party from seeking additional protections. 

(b) In the event that a Party is required, by a valid discovery request, to produce a NonParty’s confidential information in its possession, and the Party is subject to an agreement with the NonParty not to produce the Non-Party’s confidential information, then the Party shall:

(1) promptly notify in writing the Requesting Party and the Non-Party that some or all 

of the information requested is subject to a confidentiality agreement with a Non-Party; 

(2) promptly provide the Non-Party with a copy of the Stipulated Protective Order in this 

litigation, the relevant discovery request(s), and a reasonably specific description of the information 

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 9 of 14
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

9 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

requested; and 

(3) make the information requested available for inspection by the Non-Party. 

(c) If the Non-Party fails to object or seek a protective order from this court within 14 days of 

receiving the notice and accompanying information, the Receiving Party may produce the Non-Party’s 

confidential information responsive to the discovery request. If the Non-Party timely seeks a protective 

order, the Receiving Party shall not produce any information in its possession or control that is subject to 

the confidentiality agreement with the Non-Party before a determination by the court. Absent a court 

order to the contrary, the Non-Party shall bear the burden and expense of seeking protection in this court 

of its Protected Material. 

10. UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL 

If a Receiving Party learns that, by inadvertence or otherwise, it has disclosed Protected Material 

to any person or in any circumstance not authorized under this Stipulated Protective Order, the Receiving 

Party must immediately (a) notify in writing the Designating Party of the unauthorized disclosures, (b) 

use its best efforts to retrieve all unauthorized copies of the Protected Material, (c) inform the person or 

persons to whom unauthorized disclosures were made of all the terms of this Order, and (d) request such 

person or persons to execute the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” that is attached hereto 

as Exhibit A. 

11. INADVERTENT PRODUCTION OF PRIVILEGED OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED 

MATERIAL 

 When a Producing Party gives notice to Receiving Parties that certain inadvertently produced 

material is subject to a claim of privilege or other protection, the obligations of the Receiving Parties are 

those set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5)(B). This provision is not intended to modify 

whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery order that provides for production without prior 

privilege review. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) and (e), insofar as the parties reach an 

agreement on the effect of disclosure of a communication or information covered by the attorney-client 

privilege or work product protection, the parties may incorporate their agreement in the stipulated 

protective order submitted to the court. 

/// 

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 10 of 14
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

10 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

12. MISCELLANEOUS 

12.1 Right to Further Relief. Nothing in this Order abridges the right of any person to seek its 

modification by the court in the future. 

12.2 Right to Assert Other Objections. By stipulating to the entry of this Protective Order no 

Party waives any right it otherwise would have to object to disclosing or producing any information or 

item on any ground not addressed in this Stipulated Protective Order. Similarly, no Party waives any 

right to object on any ground to use in evidence of any of the material covered by this Protective Order. 

12.3 Filing Protected Material. Without written permission from the Designating Party or a 

court order secured after appropriate notice to all interested persons, a Party may not file in the public 

record in this action any Protected Material. A Party that seeks to file under seal any Protected Material 

must comply with Civil Local Rule 79-5. Protected Material may only be filed under seal pursuant to a 

court order authorizing the sealing of the specific Protected Material at issue. Pursuant to Civil Local 

Rule 79-5, a sealing order will issue only upon a request establishing that the Protected Material at issue 

is privileged, protectable as a trade secret, or otherwise entitled to protection under the law. If a 

Receiving Party's request to file Protected Material under seal pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(d) is 

denied by the court, then the Receiving Party may file the information in the public record pursuant to 

Civil Local Rule 79-5(e) unless otherwise instructed by the court. 

13. FINAL DISPOSITION 

Within 60 days after the final disposition of this action, as defined in paragraph 4, each Receiving 

Party must return all Protected Material to the Producing Party or destroy such material. As used in this 

subdivision, “all Protected Material” includes all copies, abstracts, compilations, summaries, and any 

other format reproducing or capturing any of the Protected Material. Whether the Protected Material is 

returned or destroyed, the Receiving Party must submit a written certification to the Producing Party 

(and, if not the same person or entity, to the Designating Party) by the 60 day deadline that (1) identifies 

(by category, where appropriate) all the Protected Material that was returned or destroyed and (2) affirms 

that the Receiving Party has not retained any copies, abstracts, compilations, summaries or any other 

format reproducing or capturing any of the Protected Material. Notwithstanding this provision, Counsel 

are entitled to retain an archival copy of all pleadings, motion papers, trial, deposition, and hearing 

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 11 of 14
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

11 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

transcripts, legal memoranda, correspondence, deposition and trial exhibits, expert reports, attorney work 

product, and consultant and expert work product, even if such materials contain Protected Material. Any 

such archival copies that contain or constitute Protected Material remain subject to this Protective Order 

as set forth in Section 4 (DURATION). 

 IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Dated: October 9, 2019 ANDRIAN & GALLENSON 

 By: /s/ Jane Gaskell 

 Stephen M. Gallenson 

 Jane Gaskell 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

 HUEDELL FREEMAN 

Dated: October 9, 2019 BERTRAND, FOX, ELLIOT, OSMAN & WENZEL 

 By: /s/ Gregory M. Fox 

 Gregory M. Fox 

 Joanne Tran 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, ROHNERT 

PARK DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, 

DAVID SUTTER, and BRIAN MASTERSON 

Dated: October 9, 2019 ALLEN, GLAESSNER, HAZELWOOD & WERTH 

 By: /s/ Patrick D. Moriarty 

 Dale L. Allen, Jr. 

 Kevin Patrick Allen 

 Patrick D. Moriarty 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

 JOSEPH HUFFAKER 

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 12 of 14
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

12 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

Dated: October 9, 2019 ANGELO, KILDAY & KILDUFF 

By: /s/ Derick E. Konz 

 Bruce A. Kilday 

 Derick E. Konz 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

 BRANDON “JACY” TATUM

ATTORNEY ATTESTATION 

 I, Gregory M. Fox, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to file the 

foregoing documents. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5.1(i), I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of 

these documents has been obtained from each of its Signatories.

Dated: October 9, 2019 By: /s/ Gregory M. Fox 

 Gregory M. Fox 

ORDER 

 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 

 HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

10/9/2019

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 13 of 14
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

13 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Freeman. v. City of Rohnert Park. U.S.D.C. Northern District of California Case No. 4:18-cv-07661-HSG

EXHIBIT A 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND AGREEMENT TO BE BOUND 

I, _____________________________ [print or type full name], of ________________________ 

____________________________ [print or type full address], declare under penalty of perjury that I 

have read in its entirety and understand the Stipulated Protective Order that was issued by the United 

States District Court for the Northern District of California on ___________________ [date] in the case 

of ____________________________________________ [insert formal name of the case and the number 

and initials assigned to it by the court]. I agree to comply with and to be bound by all the terms of this 

Stipulated Protective Order and I understand and acknowledge that failure to so comply could expose me 

to sanctions and punishment in the nature of contempt. I solemnly promise that I will not disclose in any 

manner any information or item that is subject to this Stipulated Protective Order to any person or entity 

except in strict compliance with the provisions of this Order. 

I further agree to submit to the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of California for the purpose of enforcing the terms of this Stipulated Protective Order, even if 

such enforcement proceedings occur after termination of this action. 

I hereby appoint __________________________ [print or type full name] of 

_______________________________________________ [print or type full address and telephone 

number] as my California agent for service of process in connection with this action or any proceedings 

related to enforcement of this Stipulated Protective Order. 

Date: ______________________________________ 

City and State where sworn and signed: _________________________________ 

Printed name: _______________________________ 

Signature: __________________________________ 

Case 4:18-cv-07661-HSG Document 64 Filed 10/09/19 Page 14 of 14