Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-01531/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-01531-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

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

ELAN MICROELECTRONICS

CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

APPLE, INC.,

Defendant. ___________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: C 09-01531 RS (PVT)

ORDER RE PARTIES’ PROPOSED

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

On January 22, 2010, the parties filed a proposed stipulated protective order regarding the

disclosure and use of discovery materials in the above-captioned action. Having reviewed the

proposed stipulated protective order,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall submit a revised form of the proposed order

that rewords Paragraph 16 to read as follows:

“Each party shall make efforts that are ‘reasonably designed’ to protect its

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

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 preCase 5:09-cv-01531-RS Document 56 Filed 01/25/10 Page 1 of 3
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

production 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 within 30 calendar days the

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

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 return or certify the

destruction of all copies (including summaries) of such material. 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, pending entry of the final form of protective order, the

provisions of the parties’ proposed form of protective order, as modified herein, shall govern the

handling of confidential information exchanged or disclosed during discovery in this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 25, 2010

 

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:09-cv-01531-RS Document 56 Filed 01/25/10 Page 2 of 3
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 3

Case 5:09-cv-01531-RS Document 56 Filed 01/25/10 Page 3 of 3