Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-05616/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-05616-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

McNAMARA, DODGE, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, PFALZER, BORGES & BROTHERS LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

P.O. BOX 5288, WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 

TELEPHONE: (925) 939-5330

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

JOINT APPLICATION AND STIPULATION FOR 

PROTECTIVE ORDER; ORDER - C03-5616 MMC 

JAMES V. FITZGERALD, III (State Bar No. 55632) 

NOAH G. BLECHMAN (State Bar No. 197167) 

MCNAMARA, DODGE, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, PFALZER, BORGES & BROTHERS LLP

1211 Newell Avenue 

Post Office Box 5288 

Walnut Creek, CA 94596 

Telephone: (925) 939-5330 

Facsimile: (925) 939-0203 

Attorneys for Defendant 

CITY OF RICHMOND, OFFICER CANTRELL, OFFICER R. 

THOMAS, OFFICER POMEROY, OFFICER MOODY, and 

OFFICER FUNK 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

LAZARIS ITALO FULLER, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

CITY OF RICHMOND, OFFICER 

CANTRELL, OFFICER R. THOMAS, 

OFFICER POMEROY, OFFICER 

MOODY, and OFFICER FUNK, 

 Defendant. 

 Case No. C03-5616 MMC 

JOINT APPLICATION AND 

STIPULATION FOR ISSUANCE OF 

PROTECTIVE ORDER; [PROPOSED] 

ORDER

The parties to this action, by and through their respective counsel, hereby apply for and 

stipulate to the issuance of the protective order attached hereto. Confidential, private and 

sensitive documents have been or will be produced in this action and there is good cause that a 

protective order is needed to maintain such privacy and confidentiality throughout the course of 

this litigation and beyond. The parties hereby agree to keep this information confidential and 

private via the protective order agreed to herein. Good cause exists for such an order. 

Counsel attests that this document is acceptable to all parties required to sign below. 

/ / / 

Case 3:03-cv-05616-MMC Document 82 Filed 09/25/06 Page 1 of 5
McNAMARA, DODGE, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, PFALZER, BORGES & BROTHERS LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

P.O. BOX 5288, WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 

TELEPHONE: (925) 939-5330

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

JOINT APPLICATION AND STIPULATION FOR 

PROTECTIVE ORDER; ORDER - C03-5616 MMC

2

DATED: Sept. ___, 2006 

REED SMITH, LLP

By /s/

Bernard J. Casey / Kirsten J. Daru 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Lazaris I. Fuller 

DATED: Sept. ___, 2006 MCNAMARA, DODGE, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, PFALZER & BORGES LLP

By: /s/ James V. Fitzgerald, III / Noah G. Blechman 

Attorneys for Defendants 

CITY OF RICHMOND, OFFICER 

CANTRELL, OFFICER R. THOMAS, 

OFFICER POMEROY, OFFICER MOODY, 

AND OFFICER FUNK 

Case 3:03-cv-05616-MMC Document 82 Filed 09/25/06 Page 2 of 5
McNAMARA, DODGE, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, PFALZER, BORGES & BROTHERS LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

P.O. BOX 5288, WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 

TELEPHONE: (925) 939-5330

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

JOINT APPLICATION AND STIPULATION FOR 

PROTECTIVE ORDER; ORDER - C03-5616 MMC

3

PROTECTIVE ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

1. As used in this Protective Order, "Confidential Information" means: 

 (a) Documents that were created or maintained by City of Richmond, 

Richmond Police Department and/or Richmond Police Commission memorializing, reflecting, 

explicating, or otherwise relating to performance evaluations, disciplinary records, as well as all 

disciplinary and internal affairs investigatory records and citizen complaint records per the 

Richmond Police Commission related to the duties of the officers as Richmond Police 

Department officers, as produced in this litigation.

 (b) Medical records produced by Plaintiff or any third party in this action with 

respect to medical treatment received by Plaintiff. 

 (c) Information that the party or non-party believes in good faith to contain 

information involving trade secrets, confidential business or financial information, or personal 

information subject to protection under California or other applicable laws.

2. The Confidential Information described above is properly subject to protection 

under Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Counsel shall not designate any 

discovery material “CONFIDENTIAL” without first making a good faith determination that 

protection is warranted and that the material falls into a specific category of documents listed in 

paragraph 1, above.

3. If a party wishes to challenge the designation of a document or portion of a 

document as “CONFIDENTIAL,” the party challenging the designation shall meet and confer in 

good faith with the designating party in an attempt to resolve the dispute. If the parties are unable 

to resolve their dispute, the party seeking confidentiality may file a motion with the Court seeking 

adjudication of the matter under F.R.C.P. 26(c). The party seeking confidentiality has the burden 

of establishing that protection is warranted under F.R.C.P. 26(c). 

4. Confidential Information shall be disclosed by the parties and their counsel only in 

accordance with the terms of this Protective Order and shall be used solely for the purposes of 

this action and shall not be used by the parties or their counsel for any other purpose. 

Case 3:03-cv-05616-MMC Document 82 Filed 09/25/06 Page 3 of 5
McNAMARA, DODGE, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, PFALZER, BORGES & BROTHERS LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

P.O. BOX 5288, WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 

TELEPHONE: (925) 939-5330

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

JOINT APPLICATION AND STIPULATION FOR 

PROTECTIVE ORDER; ORDER - C03-5616 MMC

4

5. Confidential Information shall not be disclosed by the parties or their counsel to 

anyone other than the Court and its officers, government officials associated with this action, 

court reporters and videographer (if any) present at any hearing, deposition or trial, persons who 

prepared, authored or received the information in a context outside of this litigation, the named 

parties to this action, percipient witnesses, consultants or expert witnesses retained for 

prosecution or defense of this litigation, and qualified third parties retained to assist in the 

prosecution, defense or settlement of this action (such as investigators and mediators). All such 

persons should be made aware of this protective order.

6. Exhibits or other documents that are designated by the parties as Confidential shall 

be lodged under seal. If the filing party believes that Confidential Information is necessary to 

adjudicate the matter, the filing party must file the document with the Court in a sealed envelope 

with the following label: 

"Confidential Information 

Filed Under Seal Pursuant to Protective Order 

Fuller v. City of Richmond et al., Case No. C03-5616 MMC 

[Title of Document]” 

After the filing party has conditionally lodged the Confidential Information under seal 

with the Court. Any party or non-party with an interest in maintaining the confidentiality of the 

Information or material identified as “Confidential” may file a motion to seal pursuant to Local 

Rule 79-5. Any motion to seal must be heard prior to or at the same time as the related motion or 

matter. Any motion to seal may be brought on shortened time. If no explicit assertion is made, or 

if no motion to seal is filed, the lodged Confidential documents will lose their confidentiality 

designation and my be treated as non-Confidential under this Order. 

7. Prior to hearings or testimony before the Court in this case, the parties, in the event 

that it is known reasonably in advance of such hearing or testimony that matters involving 

Confidential Information will be raised, shall so advise the Court. 

8. Nothing in this Protective Order shall affect the admissibility of any Confidential 

Information in this action. This Order furthermore does not preclude, limit, restrict or otherwise 

Case 3:03-cv-05616-MMC Document 82 Filed 09/25/06 Page 4 of 5
McNAMARA, DODGE, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, PFALZER, BORGES & BROTHERS LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

P.O. BOX 5288, WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 

TELEPHONE: (925) 939-5330

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

JOINT APPLICATION AND STIPULATION FOR 

PROTECTIVE ORDER; ORDER - C03-5616 MMC

5

apply to the use of Confidential Information at trial. The Parties reserve the right to seek any 

further orders from the Court in connection with any hearing prior to trial or during trial 

governing the use of such information at any hearing or at trial.

9. The Conclusion of this action is defined as 30 days after the expiration of the time 

to appeal or challenge any final judgment, settlement or consent decree. All provisions of this 

Order restricting the communication or use of Confidential Information continue to be binding 

after the conclusion of this action, unless otherwise agreed or ordered. Upon conclusion of this 

action, a party who received Confidential Information in the context of this action, other than that 

which is contained in pleadings, correspondence, deposition transcripts and trial documents, must 

either (a) return the documents to counsel for the party or non-party who provided such 

informationl or (b) destroy such documents and confirm such destruction in writing. 

10. Nothing in this Protective Order shall be construed to unduly hamper the rights of 

the parties to prosecute and defend this action. Nothing in this Protective Order shall preclude 

any party from moving the Court for modification of any terms and conditions thereof. Any party 

may, at any time, move the Court for modification of this Protective Order. 

11. This Protective Order shall survive the final termination of this action. The Court 

shall retain jurisdiction to enforce this Protective Order for six months after the final termination 

to resolve any dispute concerning the use of Confidential Information. 

12. Violations of this protective order may subject the violator and/or the violating 

party and/or their counsel to monetary and/or evidentiary sanctions per order of the Court. 

The Stipulated Protective Order and Proposed Order is hereby adopted by the Court as the 

Protective Order for the case and the parties are ordered to comply with this Order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: ________________, 2006. _______________________________ 

 Honorable Maxine M. Chesney 

 United States District Judge 

September 25

Case 3:03-cv-05616-MMC Document 82 Filed 09/25/06 Page 5 of 5