Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02196/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02196-7/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

1

STEWART KATZ, State Bar No. 127425

THE LAW OFFICES OF STEWART KATZ

555 University Avenue, Suite 270

Sacramento, CA 95825

Telephone: (916) 444-5678

Fax: (916) 444-3364

E-mail: stewartkatzlaw@gmail.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff Olegs Kozacenko

KAMALA D. HARRIS, State Bar No. 146672

Attorney General of California

PETER A. MESHOT, State Bar No. 117061

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

ALBERTO L. GONZÁLEZ, State Bar No. 117605

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

NELI N. PALMA, State Bar No. 203374

Deputy Attorney General

1300 I Street, Suite 125

P.O. Box 944255

Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

Telephone: (916) 445-2482

Fax: (916) 322-8288

E-mail: Neli.Palma@doj.ca.gov

Attorneys for Defendants California Highway Patrol Officer Andrew Murrill and California 

Highway Patrol Officer J. Sherman California Highway Patrol Sergeant Kevin Pierce; 

California Highway Patrol Lieutenant John Arrabit; California Patrol Assistant Chief 

Kenneth Hill; and California Highway Patrol Commander Chief Stephen Lerwill

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OLEGS KOZACENKO,

Plaintiff,

v.

California Highway Patrol Officer 

ANDREW P. MURRILL (Badge #19671); 

California Highway Patrol Officer J. 

SHERMAN (Badge #11614); California 

Highway Patrol Sergeant KEVIN PIERCE; 

California Highway Patrol Lieutenant 

JOHN ARRABIT; California Patrol 

Assistant Chief KENNETH HILL; and 

California HIghway Patrol Commander 

Chief STEPHEN LERWILL,,

Defendants.

No. 2:12-cv-2196 MCE DAD

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE 

ORDER

Case 2:12-cv-02196-MCE-DAD Document 55 Filed 06/27/14 Page 1 of 6
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

Upon joint motion of the parties, this Court, having been duly advised, hereby ORDERS 

that:

1. In accordance with the terms of this Order pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552a (b)(11), the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), in response to a subpoena duly issued pursuant to a the 

provisions of Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and to the regulations set forth at 28 

C.F.R. § 16.21, et seq., may disclose to the parties records which, in whole or in part, are 

otherwise subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, and which contain information 

within the proper scope of discovery under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26.

2. The FBI shall have the right to designate as subject to this Protective Order any 

document or other item responsive to the subpoena and which is a record subject to the Privacy 

Act or which contains or refers or relates to records which are subject to the Privacy Act.

3. Such documents or other tangible items must be designated as subject to this 

Protective Order by conspicuously stamping the phrase "SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE 

ORDER" on each page or, in the case of other tangible items, by notifying the Plaintiff in writing.

4. Information designated as SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE ORDER shall not be 

disclosed or disseminated to anyone, except:

(a) A party, counsel for any party and the employees of such counsel to whom it is 

necessary that the information be disclosed for purposes of preparation for and

litigation of this action;

(b) Any expert engaged by a party for the purpose of assisting in the preparation of 

this litigation;

(c) Any person who was involved in the preparation of the document or information;

(d) The Court, the jury and court personnel, court reporters and persons engaged to 

make copies, provided that all SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE ORDER information 

filed with the Clerk of Court shall be filed under seal and shall be released only upon 

agreement among all parties, or pursuant to the terms of this Order, or by order of the 

Court;

(e) Any other person, entity, or firm with the prior written consent of the parties.

5. Each person to whom SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE ORDER information will be 

disseminated (other than the parties, attorneys for the parties, and the attorneys' employees, the 

Court, the jury, court personnel, and court reporters) will be required, prior to any such 

Case 2:12-cv-02196-MCE-DAD Document 55 Filed 06/27/14 Page 2 of 6
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

dissemination, to receive and read a copy of this PROTECTIVE ORDER and to agree, in writing, 

to be bound by the terms of this Order and personally subject to the jurisdiction of this Court for 

the purposes of enforcement hereof in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. Counsel for any 

party receiving SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE ORDER information and disseminating same 

shall maintain a list of all such persons along with the written agreement of each person, and shall 

provide copies of such written agreements upon request to other parties at any time.

6. When any SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE ORDER information, documents, discovery 

responses, portions of transcripts or any other pleadings or papers disclosing or referring to such 

SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE ORDER information are used in connection with any motion or 

pretrial hearing, or are otherwise submitted to the Court, they shall be filed under seal and marked 

as follows: 

CONFIDENTIAL/SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE ORDER: This envelope contains 

documents that are subject to a protective order of this Court. The contents are not to 

be revealed to anyone except the Court, or with the prior written consent of the parties 

herein, or pursuant to any order of this Court. If the contents are thus revealed, they 

shall thereafter be resealed.

7. Within thirty (30) days of the close of this litigation for any reason, each party shall 

retrieve all copies of materials marked SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE ORDER from his or its 

own files, and from experts or other persons to whom he or it has provided such materials 

consistent with this Order, and shall do one of the following: (1) return to the FBI all such 

materials, including all copies thereof, or (2) certify in writing to the FBI that all such materials 

produced by such other party during this action have been destroyed. All information protected 

by this Order which has been placed in any electronic data bank shall be completely erased, and 

any documents listing or summarizing information protected by this Order shall be destroyed 

within the same period.

///

///

///

///

///

Case 2:12-cv-02196-MCE-DAD Document 55 Filed 06/27/14 Page 3 of 6
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

8. Entry of this Order shall not, in and of itself, prejudice any contention of any party upon 

any motion, nor shall this Order and any consent hereto constitute a waiver of any right to seek 

relief from the Court from any and all of the provisions hereof or other modifications of the terms 

hereof. This Order shall not limit any party's right to seek judicial review or to seek further and 

additional protection against or limitation upon production or dissemination of information and 

documents or their contents.

9. Nothing herein shall be construed to preclude or limit the presence of any individual at 

any hearing in or the trial or this action.

10. This order constitutes a limited authorization to the FBI and its agents and employees 

to disclose Privacy Act protected records pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552a (b)(11). In making the 

limited disclosure set forth herein, the FBI and its agents and employees are hereby relieved of 

any penalties to which they may otherwise be subjected pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552a (g). 

Case 2:12-cv-02196-MCE-DAD Document 55 Filed 06/27/14 Page 4 of 6
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

EXHIBIT A TO PROTECTIVE ORDER

I hereby certify that I have read the PROTECTIVE ORDER entered in the above captioned 

litigation. I hereby agree to be bound by the terms of the PROTECTIVE ORDER and to submit 

personally to the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for 

purposes of enforcing my agreement to be bound by the terms of the PROTECTIVE ORDER.

Dated: 6/13/2014 THE LAW OFFICES OF STEWART KATZ

/s/ Stewart Katz

STEWART KATZ

Attorneys for Plaintiff Olegs Kozacenko

Dated: 6/24/2014 KAMALA D. HARRIS

Attorney General of California

PETER A. MESHOT

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

/s/ Alberto L. González 

ALBERTO L. GONZÁLEZ 

Attorneys for Defendants California 

Highway Patrol Officer Andrew Murrill and 

California Highway Patrol Officer J. 

Sherman California Highway Patrol 

Sergeant Kevin Pierce; California Highway 

Patrol Lieutenant John Arrabit; California 

Patrol Assistant Chief Kenneth Hill; and 

California Highway Patrol Commander 

Chief Stephen Lerwill

SA2012307600

31965165.doc

Case 2:12-cv-02196-MCE-DAD Document 55 Filed 06/27/14 Page 5 of 6
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

ORDER

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED.1

Dated: June 26, 2014

Ddad1\orders.civil

kozacenko2196.stip.prot.ord4.doc

 

1

 Normally the undersigned would not authorize the entering of a stipulated protective 

order that granted blanket authority for the sealing of any documents. Here, however, because the

discovery at issue is finite and the terms of the protective order were provided to the parties by 

the FBI, so that the FBI may release to the parties documents otherwise protected by the Privacy 

Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. ' 552a, the undersigned will allow such an order in this instance. See

generally Laxalt v. McClatchy, 809 F.2d 885, 889, 258(C.A. D.C. 1987) (“Where the records 

sought are subject to the Privacy Act, the District Court’s supervisory responsibilities may in 

many cases be weightier than in the usual discovery context.”).

Case 2:12-cv-02196-MCE-DAD Document 55 Filed 06/27/14 Page 6 of 6