Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04312/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04312-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Insurance Contract

---

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

Law Offices 

Marc J. Wodin

1

STIPULATION AND ORDER EXPANDING THE PREVIOUS PROTECTIVE ORDER

LAW OFFICES OF MARC J. WODIN

Marc J. Wodin, Esq. - SBN 79573

21600 Oxnard Street, Suite 1110

Woodland Hills, California 91367

Telephone (818) 595-3490

Fax (818) 595-3494

Attorneys for Defendant CONSECO HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANITA D. PARATLEY,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CONSECO HEALTH INSURANCE

COMPANY and DOES 1 through

10,

inclusive,

Defendants. _____________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. C-05-4312 (MMC)

[San Francisco County Superior

Court Case No. 05-445379]

STIPULATION AND ORDER EXPANDING 

THE STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

PREVIOUSLY ISSUED BY THIS COURT

TO ENCOMPASS ADDITIONAL

DOCUMENTS

Assigned to: The Honorable

Maxine M. Chesney

STIPULATION

It is stipulated, by and between the parties to the above

entitled action, by and between their attorneys of record, as

follows:

This purpose of this stipulation is to expand the terms of

the Stipulated Protective Order, adopted as Order of this Court

on February 8, 2006, to safeguard against the disclosure of

additional confidential and/or proprietary Discovery Material,

not previously safeguarded under the terms of the Stipulated

Protective Order.

Case 3:05-cv-04312-MMC Document 37 Filed 05/01/06 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

Law Offices 

Marc J. Wodin

2

STIPULATION AND ORDER EXPANDING THE PREVIOUS PROTECTIVE ORDER

The parties hereinafter wish to expand the Stipulated

Protective Order as follows:

1. Paragraph 1 of the Stipulated Protective Order, adopted

as Order of this Court on February 8, 2006, is expanded such that

it is now applicable to all discovery produced by the parties in

this action which contain information which is private,

confidential and/or trade secret, including all writings and

information contained therein (as defined in Federal Rules of

Evidence, Rule 1001), including but not limited to documents,

deposition testimony, deposition exhibits, and interrogatory

responses (the “Discovery Material”). 

2. If any party in good faith disagrees with the

designation of Discovery Material produced by any other party or

third party, as CONFIDENTIAL, that party may seek court

intervention for a determination as to whether the Discovery

Material in question is entitled to protection from public

disclosure under governing law. Any material designated as

CONFIDENTIAL, retains all the protections afforded it by the

protective order, unless and until such time as a court of

competent jurisdiction makes a final determination that the

Discovery Material in question is not entitled to such

protections.

3. The parties and their respective attorneys are in

agreement concerning the above terms of this Stipulated

Protective Order as acknowledged hereafter by the signatures of

Case 3:05-cv-04312-MMC Document 37 Filed 05/01/06 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

Law Offices 

Marc J. Wodin

3

STIPULATION AND ORDER EXPANDING THE PREVIOUS PROTECTIVE ORDER

the attorneys for the parties, and request the Court to enter

this Stipulation and Order.

DATED: April , 2006

DATED: April , 2006

LAW OFFICES OF MARC J. WODIN

By: ____________________________

 /s/ MARC J. WODIN

Attorneys for Defendant CONSECO

HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY

FRIEDMAN, RUBIN & WHITE, LLP

By:___________________________

 /s/ MICHAEL WHITE

Attorney for Plaintiff ANITA D.

PARATLEY

ORDER

Upon due consideration of the Stipulation and Order

Expanding the Stipulated Protective Order Previously Issued by

this Court, IT IS HEREBY ADOPTED AS ORDER OF THIS COURT.

DATED:

 __________________________________ THE HONORABLE MAXINE M. CHESNEY

 DISTRICT JUDGE OF THE UNITED

 STATES DISTRICT COURT for the

 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

28

27

May 1, 2006

Case 3:05-cv-04312-MMC Document 37 Filed 05/01/06 Page 3 of 3