Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00142/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00142-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
County of Merced
Defendant
Charles Hale
Defendant
Erick Macias
Defendant
Ethan Morse
Plaintiff
Jose Sam Sanchez
Defendant

Document Text:

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 1:16-cv-00142-DAD-SKO

ORDER ON STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

LEWI

S

BRISBOI

S

BISGAAR

D

& SMITH 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO DIVISION

ETHAN MORSE,

Plaintiff,

vs.

COUNTY OF MERCED, CHARLES HALE, 

ERICK MACIAS and JOSE SAM SANCHEZ 

individually and as officers of the MERCED 

COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT and 

DOES 1-100,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:16-cv-00142-DAD-SKO

ORDER ON PROTECTIVE ORDER 

REGARDING CONFIDENTIAL 

DOCUMENTS 

(Doc. 53)

TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

The Court hereby accepts the parties' Stipulated Protective Order Regarding Confidential 

Documents (Doc. 53) and orders as follows:

1. Certain information, documents, and other things discovered from a party or 

voluntarily produced by a party in this action may include confidential or private information of 

the party from which the discovery is sought.

2. Good cause exists as 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 may be 

Case 1:16-cv-00142-DAD-SKO Document 54 Filed 10/03/16 Page 1 of 5
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 1:16-cv-00142-DAD-SKO

ORDER ON STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

LEWI

S

BRISBOI

S

BISGAAR

D

& SMITH 

warranted. Protected Material includes, but is not limited to, non-public evidence obtained during 

the course of the underlying criminal investigation and criminal action against Plaintiff, in 

whatever format that evidence may have been captured, recorded or produced, including 

interviews, downloads, photographs, charts or recreations, autopsy-related materials, and police 

reports, and summaries of those reports, and any other evidence associated with the criminal 

action. To the extent civil deposition testimony reveals or discusses this evidence, that portion of 

the testimony shall be deemed confidential. In addition, these materials may include sensitive law 

enforcement information, and personal information related to the parties or to third parties. 

Limiting disclosure of these documents to the context of this litigation as provided herein will, 

accordingly, further important law-enforcement objectives and interests, including safety of 

personnel and the public, and the protection of private and confidential information of the parties 

and of third parties. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the court to enter the 

following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer 

blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords 

from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to 

confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as 

this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; 

Civil Local Rule 141 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be 

applied when a Party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal.

3. The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected 

Material, but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, 

excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, 

presentations or disclosures by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. 

However, the protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order do not cover the following 

information: (a) any information that is in the public domain at the time of disclosure to a 

Receiving Party or becomes part of the public domain after its disclosure to a Receiving Party as a 

result of publication not involving a violation of this Stipulation and Order, including becoming 

Case 1:16-cv-00142-DAD-SKO Document 54 Filed 10/03/16 Page 2 of 5
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 1:16-cv-00142-DAD-SKO

ORDER ON STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

LEWI

S

BRISBOI

S

BISGAAR

D

& SMITH 

part of the public record through trial or otherwise; and (b) any information known to the 

Receiving Party prior to the disclosure or obtained by the Receiving Party after the disclosure 

from a source who obtained the information lawfully and under no obligation of confidentiality to 

the Designating Party (as that term is defined in the Stipulated Protective Order). Any use of 

Protected Material at trial shall be governed by a separate agreement or order.

4. Even after final disposition of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations 

imposed by the Stipulation and Order shall remain in effect until a Designating Party (as that term 

is defined in the Stipulated Protective Order) agrees otherwise in writing or a court order 

otherwise directs. Final disposition shall be deemed to be the later of (1) dismissal of all claims 

and defenses in this action, with or without prejudice; and (2) final judgment herein after the 

completion and exhaustion of all appeals, rehearings, remands, trials, or reviews of this action, 

including the time limits for filing any motions or applications for extension of time pursuant to 

applicable law.

5. Any Party or Non-Party (as that term is defined in the Stipulated Protective Order)

may challenge a designation of confidentiality at any time. Unless a prompt challenge to a 

Designating Party’s confidentiality designation is necessary to avoid foreseeable, substantial 

unfairness, unnecessary economic burdens, or a 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. Nothing in this Stipulation and Order abridges the right of any person to seek its 

modification by the Court in the future.

7. 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. A Party that seeks to file under seal any Protected Material must 

comply with Eastern District Civil Local Rule 141. To the extent not otherwise set forth in Local 

Rule 141, it shall be the burden of the Designating Party to request a sealing order from the Court, 

and not the Receiving Party to file the Protected Material. The Party seeking to file Protected 

Case 1:16-cv-00142-DAD-SKO Document 54 Filed 10/03/16 Page 3 of 5
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 1:16-cv-00142-DAD-SKO

ORDER ON STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

LEWI

S

BRISBOI

S

BISGAAR

D

& SMITH 

Material will meet and confer with the Designating Party as soon as practicable so that the 

Designating Party may make a request to seal. Protected Material may only be filed under seal 

pursuant to a court order authorizing the sealing of the specific Protected Material at issue. 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 141, a sealing order will issue only upon a request establishing that 

the Protected Material at issue is privileged, protectable as a trade secret, or otherwise entitled to 

protection under the law. To the extent it becomes necessary due to time constraints, the Parties 

may meet and confer regarding the filing of documents under conditional seal. If a Receiving 

Party's request to file Protected Material under seal pursuant to Civil Local Rule 141 is denied by 

the Court, then the Receiving Party may file the information in the public record.

8. Within 60 days after the final disposition of this action, as defined in paragraph 4, 

each Receiving Party must return all Protected Material to the Producing Party or destroy such 

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

compilations, summaries, and any other format reproducing or capturing any of the Protected 

Material. 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 60 day deadline that (1) identifies (by category, where appropriate) all 

the Protected Material that was returned or destroyed and (2) affirms that the Receiving Party has 

not retained any copies, abstracts, compilations, summaries or any other format reproducing or 

capturing any of the Protected Material. Notwithstanding this provision, Counsel are entitled to 

retain an archival copy of all pleadings, motion papers, trial, deposition, and hearing transcripts, 

legal memoranda, correspondence, deposition and trial exhibits, expert reports, attorney work 

product, and consultant and expert work product, even if such materials contain Protected 

Material. Any such archival copies that contain or constitute Protected Material remain subject to 

this Stipulation and Order as set forth in Section 4 (DURATION).

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 1:16-cv-00142-DAD-SKO Document 54 Filed 10/03/16 Page 4 of 5
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 1:16-cv-00142-DAD-SKO

ORDER ON STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

LEWI

S

BRISBOI

S

BISGAAR

D

& SMITH 

9. This Order is not binding on the Court or Court personnel. The Court may amend 

or modify this Order in the interests of justice or for public policy reasons at any time. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 2, 2016 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00142-DAD-SKO Document 54 Filed 10/03/16 Page 5 of 5