Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02303/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02303-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 470
Nature of Suit: Civil (Rico)
Cause of Action: 18:1962 Racketeering (RICO) 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 1 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 

Tyler M. Paetkau (SBN: 146305) 

tpaetkau@winston.com 

Nicole M. Norris (SBN: 222785) 

nnorris@winston.com 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

Telephone: 415-591-1000 

Facsimile: 415-591-1400 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

VINEYARD TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

MORRISON & FOERSTER, LLP 

Grant L. Kim (SBN 114989) 

Gregory A. Call (SBN 227588) 

425 Market Street 

San Francisco, CA 94105-2482 

Telephone: 415-268-7000 

Facsimile: 415-268-7522 

E-mail: gkim@mofo.com 

E-mail: gcall@mofo.com 

Attorneys for Defendatns 

TAEK MAN OH and VISION ON CHIP 

 THORNTON, TAYLOR, BECKER 7 SHINN 

Phillip F. Shinn (SBN 112051) 

Ann J. Lee (SBN 236501) 

731 Sansome Street, Suite 300 

San Francisco, CA 94111-1723 

Telephone: 415-421-8890 

Facsimile: 415-421-0688 

Attorneys for Defendants 

YOUNG KIM and 

GBY INTERNATIONAL GROUP 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

VINEYARD TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a 

California corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

TAEK MAN OH, an individual, YOUNG KIM, 

an individual, VISION ON CHIP, a corporation, 

and GBY INTERNATIONAL GROUP, a 

corporation 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. CV 06-2303 MHP 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED 

PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Judge: Hon. Marilyn Hall Patel 

TAEK MAN OH, an individual, and VISION ON 

CHIP, a corporation, 

Counterclaimants, 

vs. 

VINEYARD TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a 

California corporation, and JUN KIM, an 

individual 

Counterdefendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 1 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

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 would be warranted. 

Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the court to enter the following Stipulated 

Protective Order (Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)). The parties acknowledge that this Order does 

not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it 

affords extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled under the applicable legal 

principles to treatment as confidential. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 5.3, 

below, that this Stipulated Protective Order creates no entitlement to file confidential information 

under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and reflects the 

standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under 

seal. 

2. DEFINITIONS

2.1 Party: Any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, 

consultants, retained experts, and outside counsel (and their support staff). 

2.2 Disclosure or Discovery Material: All items or information, regardless of the 

medium or manner generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, 

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

discovery in this matter. 

2.3 “Confidential” Information or Items: Information (regardless of how generated, 

stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under standards developed under 

F.R.Civ.P. 26(c). 

2.4 “Highly confidential - Attorneys’ Eyes Only” Information or Items: Extremely 

sensitive “Confidential Information or Items” whose disclosure to another Party or nonparty would 

create a substantial risk of serious injury that could not be avoided by less restrictive means. 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 2 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

2.5 Receiving Party: A Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a 

Producing Party. 

2.6 Producing Party: A Party or non-party that produces Disclosure or Discovery 

Material in this action. 

2.7. Designating Party: A Party or non-party that designates information or items that it 

produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential— 

Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” 

2.8 Protected Material: Any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated a 

“Confidential” or “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” 

2.9. Outside Counsel: Attorneys who are not employees of a Party but who are retained to 

represent or advise a Party in this action. 

2.10. House Counsel: Attorneys who are employees of a Party. 

2.11. Counsel (without qualifier): Outside Counsel and House Counsel (as well as their 

support staffs). 

2.12. 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 and who is not a past or a current employee of a Party or of a competitor of 

a Party’s and who, at the time of retention, is not anticipated to become an employee of a Party or a 

competitor of a Party’s. This definition includes a professional jury or trial consultant retained in 

connection with this litigation. 

2.13. Professional Vendors: Persons or entities that provide litigation support services 

(e.g., photocopying; videotaping; translating and interpreting; preparing exhibits or demonstrations; 

organizing, storing, retrieving data in any form or medium; etc.) and their employees and 

subcontractors. 

3. SCOPE

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

defined above), but also any information copied or extracted therefrom, as well as all copies, 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 3 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

excerpts, summaries, or compilations thereof, plus testimony, conversations, or presentations by 

parties or counsel to or in court or in other settings that might reveal Protected Material. 

4. DURATION

Even after the termination 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. 

5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL

 5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection. Each Party or 

non-party 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. Before 

designating any specific information “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential - Attorneys’ Eyes 

Only” the Designating Party’s counsel shall make a good faith determination that the information 

warrants protection under Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

A Designating Party must take care to 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), expose the Designating Party to 

sanctions. If it comes to a Party’s or a non-party’s attention that information or items that it 

designated for protection do not qualify for protection at all, or do not qualify for the level of 

protection initially asserted, that Party or non-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, material 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 4 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

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 (apart from transcripts of depositions or 

other pretrial or trial proceedings), that the Producing Party affix the legend “Confidential” or 

“Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only” at the top of 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) and must specify, for each portion, the level of protection being asserted 

(either “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only”). 

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 “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes 

Only.” 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 

appropriate legend (“Confidential” or “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only”) at the top or 

bottom of 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) and must specify, for each portion, the level 

of protection being asserted (either “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes 

Only”). 

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

the Party or non-party offering or sponsoring the testimony identify on the record, before the close of 

the deposition, hearing, or other proceeding, all protected testimony, and further specify the level of 

protection being asserted. When it is impractical to identify separately each portion of testimony 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 5 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

that is entitled to protection, and when it appears that substantial portions of the testimony may 

qualify for protection, the Party or non-party that sponsors, offers, or gives the testimony may invoke 

on the record (before the deposition or proceeding is concluded) a right to have up to 20 days to 

identify the specific portions of the testimony as to which protection is sought and to specify the 

level of protection being asserted. Only those portions of the testimony that are appropriately 

designated for protection within the 20 days shall be covered by the provisions of this Stipulated 

Protective Order. 

Transcript pages containing Protected Material must be separately bound by the court 

reporter, who must affix to the top of each such page the legend “Confidential” or “Highly 

Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only,” as instructed by the Party or nonparty offering or sponsoring 

the witness or presenting the testimony. 

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

other tangible 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” or 

“Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” If only portions of the information or item warrant 

protection, the Producing Party, to the extent practicable, shall identify the protected portions, 

specifying whether they qualify as “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” 

5.3 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. This Order creates no entitlement to file confidential information under seal. 

Any party wishing to file under seal any Protected Material shall submit the document(s) along with 

an Administrative Motion to File Under Seal pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5. The document(s) 

shall be lodged with the clerk in an appropriate envelope conforming to the requirements of Civil 

Local Rule 79-5(b)(3) or 79-5(c)(3) (as applicable), labeled with the case name and number and the 

title of the document(s), and bearing a statement substantially in the following form: 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 6 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

 CONFIDENTIAL 

DOCUMENT SUBMITTED UNDER SEAL. THIS ENVELOPE IS NOT TO BE 

OPENED AND THE CONTENTS THEREOF SHALL NOT BE DISPLAYED OR 

REVEALED EXCEPT BY OR TO QUALIFIED PERSONS OR BY COURT 

ORDER. 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(b)(1) and 79-5(c)(1), any party wishing to file an entire 

document under seal must also file and serve declaration(s) establishing that the entire document is 

sealable, and any party wishing to file a portion of a document under seal must also file and serve 

declaration(s) establishing that a portion of the document is sealable. 

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

designate qualified information or items as “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ 

Eyes Only” does not, standing alone, waive the Designating Party’s right to secure protection under 

this Order for such material. If material is appropriately designated as “Confidential” or “Highly 

Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only” after the material was initially produced, the Receiving Party, 

on timely notification of the designation, 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. Unless a prompt challenge to a Designating Party’s 

confidentiality designation is necessary to avoid foreseeable substantial unfairness, unnecessary 

economic burdens, or a later 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. A Party that elects to initiate a challenge to a Designating Party’s 

confidentiality designation must do so in good faith and must begin the process by conferring 

directly (in voice to voice dialogue; other forms of communication are not sufficient) with counsel 

for the Designating Party. 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 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 7 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

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. 

6.3 Judicial Intervention. A Party that elects to press a challenge to a confidentiality 

designation after considering the justification offered by the Designating Party may file and serve a 

motion under Civil Local Rule 7 (and in compliance with Civil Local Rule 79-5, if applicable) that 

identifies the challenged material and sets forth in detail the basis for the challenge. Each such 

motion must be accompanied by a competent declaration that affirms that the movant has complied 

with the meet and confer requirements imposed in the preceding paragraph and that sets forth with 

specificity the justification for the confidentiality designation that was given by the Designating 

Party in the meet and confer dialogue. The burden of persuasion in any such challenge proceeding 

shall be on the Designating Party. Until the court rules on the challenge, 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. 

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 not be used for any 

commercial or business purpose, and 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 10, below (FINAL DISPOSITION). 

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

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: 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 8 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

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

said Counsel to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose the information for this litigation and 

who have signed the “Agreement to Be Bound by Protective Order” that is attached hereto as Exhibit 

A; 

 (b) the officers, directors, consultants and employees (including House Counsel) 

of the Receiving Party to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this litigation and who have 

signed the “Agreement to Be Bound by Protective Order” (Exhibit A). Source code and similar 

detailed technical information (such as net lists and GDS databases) designated as "Confidential" 

shall be disclosed only to a limited number of employees of the Receiving Party, who have access to 

source code or similar detailed technical information (such as netlists and GDS databases) of a 

similar nature during the normal course of their employment. The Receiving Party shall take special 

precaution that such source code is not disclosed to unauthorized persons and is used only for 

purpose of this litigation and not for development of any current or future products; 

 (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 “Agreement to Be Bound by 

Protective Order” (Exhibit A); 

 (d) any mediator agreed to by the Parties and any staff of the mediator or of the 

affiliated dispute resolution agency; 

 (e) the Court and its personnel; 

 (f) court reporters, their staffs, and professional vendors to whom disclosure is 

reasonably necessary for this litigation and who have signed the “Agreement to Be Bound by 

Protective Order” (Exhibit A); 

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

reasonably necessary and who have signed the “Agreement to Be Bound by Protective Order” 

(Exhibit A). 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; 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 9 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

 (h) the author and recipient of the document, as designated by the face of the 

document, or the original source of the information. 

7.3 Disclosure of “Highly Confidential - Attorneys’ Eyes Only” 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 “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes 

Only” only to: 

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

said Counsel to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose the information for this litigation and 

who have signed the “Agreement to Be Bound by Protective Order” that is attached hereto as Exhibit 

A; 

 (b) Experts (as defined in this Order) (1) to whom disclosure is reasonably 

necessary for this litigation, (2) who have signed the “Agreement to Be Bound by Protective Order” 

(Exhibit A); 

 (c) any mediator agreed to by the Parties and any staff of the mediator or of the 

affiliated dispute resolution agency; 

 (d) the Court and its personnel; 

 (e) court reporters, their staffs, and professional vendors to whom disclosure is 

reasonably necessary for this litigation and who have signed the “Agreement to Be Bound by 

Protective Order” (Exhibit A); and 

 (f) the author and recipient of the document, as designated by the face of the 

document, or the original source of the information. 

Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the Receiving Party's Outside 

Counsel may rely on or refer generally to items designated as "Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes 

Only" in providing legal advice to the Receiving Party, provided that the specific content of the 

"Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only" items is not disclosed to the Receiving Party. 

8. PROTECTED MATERIAL SUBPOENAED OR ORDERED PRODUCED IN OTHER 

LITIGATION

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 10 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

If a Receiving Party is served with a subpoena or an order issued in other litigation that 

would compel disclosure of any information or items designated in this action as “Confidential” or 

“Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only,” the Receiving Party must so notify the Designating 

Party, in writing (by fax, if possible) immediately and in no event more than three court days after 

receiving the subpoena or order. Such notification must include a copy of the subpoena or court 

order. The Receiving Party also must immediately inform in writing the Party who caused the 

subpoena or order to issue in the other litigation that some or all the material covered by the 

subpoena or order is the subject of this Protective Order. In addition, the Receiving Party must 

deliver a copy of this Stipulated Protective Order promptly to the Party in the other action that 

caused the subpoena or order to issue. The purpose of imposing these duties is to alert the interested 

parties to the existence of this Protective Order and to afford the Designating Party in this case an 

opportunity to try to protect its confidentiality interests in the court from which the subpoena or 

order issued. The Designating Party shall bear the burdens and the expenses 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. 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 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. 

10. FINAL DISPOSITION 

Unless otherwise ordered or agreed in writing by the Producing Party, within sixty days after 

the final termination of this action, each Receiving Party must return all Protected Material to the 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 11 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

Producing Party. As used in this subdivision, “all Protected Material” includes all copies, abstracts, 

compilations, summaries or any other form of reproducing or capturing any of the Protected 

Material. With permission in writing from the Designating Party, the Receiving Party may destroy 

some or all of the Protected Material instead of returning it. 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 sixty day deadline that 

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

and that affirms that the Receiving Party has not retained any copies, abstracts, compilations, 

summaries or other forms of reproducing or capturing any of the Protected Material. 

Notwithstanding this provision, Counsel are entitled to retain an archival copy of all pleadings, 

motion papers, transcripts, legal memoranda, correspondence or attorney 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), above. 

11. MISCELLANEOUS

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

its modification by the Court in the future. 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 12 of 15
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 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

11.2 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. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD. 

Dated: June 2, 2006 WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 

/s/ Nicole M. Norris 

Tyler M. Paetkau 

Nicole M. Norris 

Attorneys for Plaintiff/CounterDefendant 

VINEYARD TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and JUN 

KIM 

Dated: June 2, 2006 MORRISON & FOERSTER 

/s/ Gregory A. Call 

Grant L. Kim 

Gregory A. Call 

Attorneys for Defendants/CounterPlaintiffs 

TAEK MAN OH & VISION ON CHIP 

Dated: June 2, 2006 THORNTON, TAYLOR, BECKER & SHINN 

/s/ Phillip F. Shinn 

Phillip F. Shinn 

Ann J. Lee 

Attorneys for Defendants 

YOUNG KIM & GBY INTERNATIONAL 

GROUP 

I hereby attest that I have on file all holograph signatures for any signatures indicated by a 

“conformed signature (/s/) within this efiled document. 

/s/ Nicole M. Norris 

Nicole M. Norris 

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 13 of 15
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 14 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

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 in the case of VINEYARD TECHNOLOGIES, INC vs. TAEK MAN 

OH, YOUNG KIM, VISION ON CHIP, and GBY INTERNATIONAL GROUP, Case No. CV-06-

2303 MHP. 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. In particular, I understand and I will comply 

with this Stipulated Protective Order's provisions that (a)information designated as "Confidential" 

shall not be disclosed to persons other than those described in section 7.2; (b) information designated 

as "Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only" shall not be disclosed to persons other than those 

described in section 7.3; and (c) all Protected Material shall be used only for purposes related to this 

litigation, and shall not be used for any commercial or business purpose. 

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 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 14 of 15
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 15 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

CASE NO. CV-06-2303 MHP 

SF:130776.2

Winston & Strawn LLP 

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED

Dated: _____________, 2006 

 

THE HONORABLE MARILYN HALL PATEL 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

July 26 See Attached Supplement

Case 3:06-cv-02303-MHP Document 43 Filed 07/27/06 Page 15 of 15