Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-02889/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-02889-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

ORDER, page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

IN RE INTEL LAPTOP BATTERY

LITIGATION,

___________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: C 09-2889 JW (PVT)

ORDER AMENDING STIPULATED

PROTECTIVE ORDER TO ADDRESS

HANDLING OF INADVERTENTLY

PRODUCED PRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS

On April 2, 2010, the parties submitted a stipulation and proposed order regarding the

handling of inadvertently produced privileged documents. Based on the parties’ stipulation,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Stipulated Protective Order entered in this action on

January 14, 2010 (docket no. 54), is amended to add the following Paragraph 13:

13. Each party shall make efforts that are reasonably designed to protect its

privileged materials. See Gomez v. Vernon, 255 F.3d 1118, 1131-32 (9 Cir. 2001). th

What constitutes efforts that are “reasonably designed” to protect privileged materials

depends on the circumstances; the law does not require ‘strenuous or Herculean

efforts,’ just ‘reasonable efforts.’ See, e.g., Hynix Semiconductor, Inc. v. Rambus,

Inc. 2008 WL 350641, *1–*2 (ND Cal., Feb. 2, 2008); see also, FED.R.CIV.PRO.

26(f)(3) advisory committee’s notes to 2006 amendments (discussing the substantial

costs and delays that can result from attempts to avoid waiving privilege, particularly

when discovery of electronic information is involved). When a particular Rule 34

request requires a production or inspection that is too voluminous, expedited or

complex (such as certain electronic productions) to allow for an adequate preproduction review, the parties may enter into non-waiver agreements for that

particular production. If the requesting party is unwilling to enter into such an

agreement, the Producing Party may move the court for a non-waiver order.

In the event that, despite reasonable efforts, a Producing Party discovers it has

inadvertently produced privileged materials, then as soon as reasonably possible the

Producing party shall notify the Receiving Party that the document(s) or materials

Case 5:09-cv-02889-JW Document 71 Filed 04/05/10 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

ORDER, page 2

should have been withheld on grounds of privilege. After the Receiving Party

receives this notice from the Producing Party under this paragraph, the Receiving

Party shall not disclose or release the inadvertently produced material to any person or

entity pending resolution of the Producing Party’s claim of privilege. The parties

shall hold a meet and confer, as defined in Civil Local Rule 1-5(n), as soon as

reasonably possible after a notice of inadvertent production. If the Producing Party

and Receiving Party agree that the inadvertently produced material is privileged, and

was disclosed despite efforts by the Producing Party that were ‘reasonably designed’

to protect the materials, then the Receiving Party shall: 1) refrain from any further

examination or disclosure of such document(s); 2) return or certify the destruction of

all copies (including summaries and excerpts) of such material; and (c) not use such

material for any purpose. If no agreement is reached, then within 10 court days after

the meet and confer, the Producing Party must seek a ruling from this court to

establish that the material is privileged and that the Producing Party did not waive the

privilege by inadvertently producing the material. If the Producing Party seeks such a

ruling, the Receiving Party shall not disclose or release the inadvertently produced

material to any person or entity pending the court’s ruling on the Producing Party’s

motion.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all other provisions of the Stipulated Protective Order

remain in force.

Dated: April 5, 2010

 

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:09-cv-02889-JW Document 71 Filed 04/05/10 Page 2 of 2