United States District Court

for the

Southern District of Florida

DeCurtis LLC, Plaintiff,

v.

Carnival Corporation, Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 20-22945-Civ-Scola

Order Requiring Discovery and Scheduling Conference and

Order Referring Discovery Matters to the Magistrate Judge

This matter is before the Court upon an independent review of the 

record. This case was recently transferred to this Court from the Middle 

District of Florida. Any previously entered scheduling orders are vacated. In 

addition to the requirements set forth below, the Court orders the parties to 

meet and confer and to file a joint status report, on or before July 30, 2020,

regarding the current posture of this case and any pending issues ripe for the 

Court’s review. It is further ordered and adjudged as follows:

1. Within 21 days of the filing of a response to the complaint by a

Defendant in this matter, or within 21 days of the date of this order if a 

response has already been filed, the parties must meet and confer regarding 

discovery and scheduling issues, as set out in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

26(f) and Local Rule 16.1(b).

2. Within 14 days of the parties’ discovery-and-scheduling conference, the 

parties must file a joint discovery-plan-and-conference report, as set forth in 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f)(3) and Local Rule 16.1(b)(2). The parties 

should note that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f)(3)(B) and Local Rule 

16.1(b)(C) requires the joint discovery-plan-and-conference report to state the 

parties’ proposed time limit to complete discovery.

3. The parties do not need to submit a joint proposed scheduling order 

pursuant to Local Rule 16.1(b)(3). Recognizing the complexity of most patent 

cases, it is this Court’s practice to set patent cases on a protracted schedule.

This protracted case track requires the parties to exchange proposed terms for 

construction approximately three months from the date of the Court’s 

Scheduling Order, and to complete fact discovery approximately one year from 

the entry of the Scheduling Order. The Court’s patent case track is set forth in 

Attachment “A” to this Order. If the parties believe that this case is more 

straightforward than the typical patent case, and would benefit from a more 

expedited case track, the parties must set out the reasons justifying an 

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 1 of 20
expedited schedule along with a proposed schedule of trial and pretrial 

deadlines.

4. Magistrate Judge Referral. By virtue of 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the 

Magistrate Rules of the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida, the 

Court refers all discovery motions in this case to United States Magistrate 

Judge Edwin G. Torres to take all necessary and proper action as required by 

law.

5. Settlement Conference Before Magistrate Judge. The parties may, at any 

time, file a motion requesting a settlement conference before Judge Torres. The 

Court encourages the parties to consider a confidential settlement conference 

with Judge Torres, especially if the parties believe there is a meaningful chance 

of reaching an early, amicable resolution of their dispute.

6. Discovery Motion Procedures. Judge Torres will enter a separate order 

regarding his discovery procedures.

Done and ordered, at Miami, Florida, on July 23, 2020.

________________________________

Robert N. Scola, Jr.

United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 2 of 20
Attachment “A” to the Order Requiring 

Discovery and Scheduling Conference

weeks after 

entry of the 

scheduling 

order

2 weeks

Deadline for a party claiming patent infringement to serve 

Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions 

and make accompanying document production.

4 weeks Deadline to join additional parties or to amend pleadings.

7 weeks

Deadline for a party opposing a claim of patent infringement 

or asserting invalidity or unenforceability to serve NonInfringement, Unenforceability, and Invalidity Contentions 

and make accompanying document production.

11 weeks

Deadline to Exchange Proposed Terms for Construction.

Deadline to submit joint notice indicating whether the parties 

consent to jurisdiction before the designated magistrate judge 

for purposes of final disposition.

16 weeks Deadline to Exchange of Preliminary Claim Constructions 

and Extrinsic Evidence.

21 weeks Deadline to file joint interim status report.

23 weeks Deadline to File Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing 

Statement.

26 weeks

Deadline to Complete Claim Construction Discovery.

Deadline to file a motion to stay the lawsuit pending 

reexamination in the U.S. Patent Office.

Deadline to file Proposed Order Scheduling Mediation, setting 

forth the name of the mediator, and the date, time, and 

location of the mediation, consistent with the Order of 

Referral to Mediation.

28 weeks

Deadline to file opening Claim Construction brief and 

deadline to file opening brief asserting claims for invalidity 

and unenforceability.

38 weeks Deadline to provide information regarding advice of counsel.

(If the Court has not yet ruled on claim construction the 

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 3 of 20
parties should file a motion to extend this date.)

43 weeks

Deadline to complete fact discovery.

Deadline to disclose the identity of expert witnesses, and to 

exchange expert witness summaries/reports pursuant to 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2). Rebuttal disclosures 

are permitted, and must conform to the deadline set forth in 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(C)(ii).

44 weeks Deadline to complete mediation.

49 weeks Deadline to complete all expert discovery.

51 weeks Deadline for the filing of all dispositive motions and Daubert

motions.

8 weeks 

BEFORE 

calendar call

Deadline for the filing of pretrial motions, including motions 

in limine.

4 weeks

BEFORE the 

trial date

Deadline to file joint pretrial stipulation pursuant to Local 

Rule 16.1(e) and pretrial disclosures pursuant to Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3).

2 weeks

BEFORE the 

trial date

Deadline to file proposed jury instructions (if the matter is set 

for a jury trial) or proposed findings of fact and conclusions of 

law (if the matter is set for a bench trial) pursuant to Local 

Rule 16.1(k).

68 weeks

(approximate)

Two-week trial period commences (calendar call will be 

scheduled on the Tuesday before the trial period).

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 4 of 20
United States District Court

for the

Southern District of Florida

DeCurtis LLC, Plaintiff,

v.

Carnival Corporation, Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 20-22945-Civ-Scola

Patent Rules

The Patent Rules contained in this Order will govern the proceedings in 

this case.1 The timing and sequence will be governed by the Court’s Scheduling 

Order. The parties must carefully review and comply with all of these rules.

Failure to comply may result in the imposition of sanctions on the offending 

party, counsel, or both.

1. Scope of Rules

1-1. Title

These are the Patent Rules that govern patent proceedings before the 

undersigned judge. They should be cited as “P.R. ___.”

1-2. Scope and Construction

These rules apply to all civil actions pending before Judge Robert N. 

Scola, Jr. in which a party makes a claim of infringement, noninfringement, invalidity, or unenforceability of a utility patent. The Local 

Rules of the Southern District of Florida also apply to this action, except 

to the extent that they are inconsistent with these Patent Rules.

1-3. Modification of these Rules

The Court may modify the obligations or deadlines set forth in these 

Patent Rules based on the circumstances of any particular case, 

including, without limitation, the simplicity or complexity of the cases as 

shown by the patents, claims, products, or parties involved. Before 

submitting any request for a modification, the parties must meet and 

confer for the purposes of reaching an agreement, if possible, upon any 

modification.

2. General Provisions

2-1. Governing Procedure Initial Case Management Conference. When the 

parties confer pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f), in 

1 These Patent Rules are taken largely from the Local Patent Rules in the 

Northern District of California and the Northern District of Illinois.

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 5 of 20
addition to the matters covered by Rule 26, the parties must discuss and 

address in the Case Management Statement filed pursuant to Rule 26(f) 

and Local Rule 16.1(b) the following topics: 

(a) Proposed modification of the obligations or deadlines set 

forth in these Patent Rules to ensure that they are suitable 

for the circumstances of the particular case (see P.R. 1-3);

(b) The scope and timing of any claim construction discovery 

including disclosure of and discovery from any expert 

witness permitted by the court;

(c) The format of the Claim Construction Hearing, including 

whether the Court will hear live testimony, the order of 

presentation, and the estimated length of the hearing; and

(d) How the parties intend to educate the court on the 

technology at issue.

2-2. Confidentiality

The Court will enter a protective order the same day it enters these 

Patent Rules. Any party may move the Court to modify the protective 

order for good cause. The filing of such a motion does not affect the 

requirement for or timing of any of the disclosures required by any 

Scheduling Order, or these Patent Rules. Discovery cannot be withheld 

on the basis of confidentiality, in the absence of a Court order. 

2-3. Certification of Disclosures

All statements, disclosures, or charts filed or served in accordance with 

these Patent Rules must be dated and signed by counsel of record. 

Counsel’s signature shall constitute a certification that to the best of his 

or her knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry that is 

reasonable under the circumstances, the information contained in the 

statement, disclosure, or chart is complete and correct at the time it is 

made.

2-4. Admissibility of Disclosures

The disclosures provided for in these Patent Rules are inadmissible as 

evidence on the merits. A party may use or make reference to these 

disclosures for any other appropriate purpose.

2-5. Relationship to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

A party may not object to mandatory disclosures under Rule 26(a) or to a 

discovery request on the grounds that it conflicts with or is premature 

under these Patent Rules, except to the following categories of requests 

and disclosures: 

(a) Requests seeking to elicit a party’s claim construction position;

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 6 of 20
(b) Requests seeking to elicit from the patent claimant a comparison of 

the asserted claims and the accused apparatus, product, device, 

process, method, act, or other instrumentality;

(c) Requests seeking to elicit from an accused infringer a comparison 

of the asserted claims and the prior art;

(d) Requests to an accused infringer for its non-infringement 

contentions; and

(e) Requests seeking to elicit from an accused infringer the 

identification of any advice of counsel, and related documents.

3. Patent Disclosures

3-1. Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions 

A party claiming patent infringement must serve on all parties 

“Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions” containing 

the following information:

(a) Identification of each claim of each patent in suit that is allegedly 

infringed by each opposing party, including for each claim the 

applicable statutory subsections of 35 U.S.C. § 271 asserted;

(b) Separately for each asserted claim, each accused apparatus, 

product, device, process, method, act, or other instrumentality 

(“Accused Instrumentality”) of each opposing party of which the 

party is aware. This identification must be as specific as possible. 

Each product, device, and apparatus must be identified by name 

or model number, if known. Each method or process must be 

identified by name, if known, or by any product, device, or 

apparatus which, when used, allegedly results in the practice of 

the claimed method or process;

(c) A chart identifying specifically where each limitation of each 

asserted claim is found within each Accused Instrumentality, 

including for each element that such party contends is governed by 

35 U.S.C. § 112(6), the identity of the structure(s), act(s), or 

material(s) in the Accused Instrumentality that performs the 

claimed function;

(d) For each claim that is alleged to have been indirectly infringed, an 

identification of any direct infringement and a description of the 

acts of the alleged indirect infringer that contribute to or are 

inducing that direct infringement. If alleged direct infringement is 

based on joint acts of multiple parties, the role of each such party 

in the direct infringement must be described.

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 7 of 20
(e) Whether each limitation of each asserted claim is alleged to be 

literally present or present under the doctrine of equivalents in the 

Accused Instrumentality. For any claim under the doctrine of 

equivalents, the Initial Infringement Contentions must include an 

explanation of each function, way, and result that is equivalent 

any why any differences are not substantial;

(f) For any patent that claims priority to an earlier application, the 

priority date to which each asserted claim allegedly is entitled; 

(g) If a party claiming patent infringement wishes to preserve the right 

to rely, for any purpose, on the assertion that its own apparatus, 

product, device, process, method, act, or other instrumentality 

practices the claimed invention, the party must identify, separately 

for each asserted claim, each such apparatus, product, device, 

process, method, act, or other instrumentality that incorporates or

reflects that particular claim; and

(h) If a party claiming patent infringement alleges willful infringement, 

the basis for such allegation.

3-2. Document Production Accompanying Disclosure 

With the “Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions,” 

the party claiming patent infringement must produce to each opposing 

party or make available for inspection and copying the following:

(a) Documents (e.g., contracts, purchase orders, invoices, 

advertisements, marketing materials, offer letters, beta site testing 

agreements, and third party or joint development agreements) 

sufficient to evidence each discussion with, disclosure to, or other 

manner of providing to a third party, or sale of or offer to sell, or 

any public use of, the claimed invention prior to the date of 

application for the patent in suit. A party’s production of a 

document as required under this Rule does not constitute an 

admission that such document evidences or is prior art under 35 

U.S.C. § 102;

(b) All documents evidencing the conception, reduction to practice, 

design, and development of each claimed invention, which were 

created on or before the date of application for the patent in suit or 

the priority date identified pursuant to Patent Rule 3-1(f), 

whichever is earlier;

(c) A copy of the file history for each patent in suit; and

(d) All documents evidencing ownership of the patent rights by the 

party asserting patent infringement.

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 8 of 20
(e) If a party identifies instrumentalities pursuant to Patent Rule 3-

1(g), documents sufficient to show the operation of any aspects or 

elements of such instrumentalities the patent claimant relies upon 

as embodying any asserted claims.

The producing party must separately identify by production number 

which documents correspond to each category.

3-3. Non-Infringement, Unenforceability, and Invalidity Contentions

Each party opposing a claim of patent infringement or asserting 

invalidity or unenforceability must serve upon all parties its “NonInfringement, Unenforceability, and Invalidity Contentions” containing 

the following information:

(a) The identity of each item of prior art that allegedly anticipates each 

asserted claim or renders it obvious. Each prior art patent must be 

identified by its number, country of origin, and date of issue. Each 

prior art publication must be identified by its title, date of 

publication, and where feasible, author and publisher. Prior art 

under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) must be identified by specifying the item 

offered for sale or publicly used or known, the date the offer or use 

took place or the information became known, and the identity of 

the person or entity which made the use or which made and 

received the offer, or the person or entity which made the 

information known or to whom it was made known. Prior art under 

35 U.S.C. § 102(f) must be identified by providing the name of the 

person(s) from whom and the circumstances under which the 

invention or any part of it was derived. Prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 

102(g) must be identified by providing the identities of the 

person(s) or entities involved in and the circumstances 

surrounding the making of the invention before the patent 

applicant(s);

(b) A statement of whether each item of prior art anticipates each 

asserted claim or renders it obvious. If a combination of items of 

prior art allegedly makes a claim obvious, include an identification 

of each combination of prior art showing obviousness;

(c) A chart identifying where specifically in each alleged item of prior 

art each limitation of each asserted claim is found, including for 

each limitation that such party contends is governed by 35 U.S.C. 

§ 112(6), the identity of the structure(s), act(s), or material(s) in 

each item of prior art that performs the claimed function; 

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 9 of 20
(d) Any grounds of invalidity based on 35 U.S.C. § 101, indefiniteness 

under 35 U.S.C. § 112(2) or enablement or written description 

under 35 U.S.C. § 112(1) of any of the asserted claims; and

(e) Unenforceability contentions must identify the acts allegedly 

supporting and all bases for the assertion of unenforceability.

3-4. Document Production Accompanying Invalidity Contentions

With the “Non-Infringement, Unenforceability, and Invalidity 

Contentions,” the party opposing a claim of patent infringement must

produce or make available for inspection and copying:

(a) Source code, specifications, schematics, flow charts, artwork, 

formulas, or other documentation sufficient to show the operation 

of any aspects or elements of an Accused Instrumentality identified 

by the patent claimant in its Patent Rule 3-1(c) chart; and

(b) A copy or sample of the prior art identified pursuant to Patent Rule

3-3(a) that does not appear in the file history of the patent(s) at 

issue. To the extent any such item is not in English, an English 

translation of the portion(s) relied upon must be produced. 

The producing party must separately identify by production number 

which documents correspond to each category. 

3-5. Disclosure Requirement in Patent Cases Initiated by Complaint for

Declaratory Judgment

In a case initiated by a compliant for declaratory judgment in which a 

party files a pleading seeking a judgment that a patent is not infringed, is 

invalid, or is unenforceable, Patent Rule 3-1 and 3-2 will not apply 

unless a party makes a claim for patent infringement. If no claim for 

patent infringement is made, the party seeking a declaratory judgment 

must comply with Patent Rule 3-3 and 3-4 within 28 days after the 

parties’ discovery and scheduling conference.

3-6. Amendment to Contentions

Amendment of the Infringement Contentions or the Invalidity 

Contentions may be made only with leave of the Court upon a timely 

showing of good cause. Non-exhaustive examples of circumstances that 

may, in the absence of undue prejudice to the non-moving party, support 

a finding of good cause include the following:

(a) A claim construction by the Court different from that proposed by 

the party seeking amendment;

(b) Recent discovery of material, prior art despite earlier diligent 

search; and

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 10 of 20
(c) Recent discovery of nonpublic information about the Accused 

Instrumentality that was not discovered, despite diligent efforts, 

before the service of the Infringement Contentions. 

The duty to supplement discovery responses does not excuse the need to 

obtain leave of court to amend contentions. 

3-7. Advice of Counsel

Each party relying upon advice of counsel as part of a patent-related 

claim or defense for any reason must complete the following tasks:

(a) Produce or make available for inspection and copying any written 

advice and documents related to that advice for which the 

attorney-client and work product protection have been waived;

(b) Provide a written summary of any oral advice and produce or make 

available for inspection and copying that summary and documents 

related that advice for which the attorney-client and work product 

protection have been waived; and

(c) Serve a privilege log identifying any other documents, except those 

authored by counsel acting solely as trial counsel, relating to the 

subject matter of the advice that the party is withholding on the 

grounds of attorney-client privilege or work product protection.

A party who does not comply with the requirements of Patent Rule 3-7 

will not be permitted to rely on advice of counsel for any purpose absent 

a stipulation of all parties or by order of the Court.

4. Claim Construction Proceedings

4-1. Exchange of Proposed Terms for Construction

(a) Each party must serve on each other party a list of claim terms 

that the party contends should be construed by the Court, and 

identify any claim term that the party contends should be governed 

by 35 U.S.C. § 112(6).

(b) The parties must then meet and confer for the purposes of limiting 

the terms in dispute by narrowing or resolving differences and 

facilitating the ultimate preparation of a Joint Claim Construction 

and Prehearing Statement. The parties must also jointly identify 

the 10 terms likely to be most significant to resolving the parties’ 

dispute, including those terms for which construction may be case 

or claim dispositive.

4-2. Exchange of Preliminary Claim Constructions and Extrinsic 

Evidence 

(a) The parties must simultaneously exchange proposed constructions 

of each term identified by either party for claim construction. Each 

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 11 of 20
such “Preliminary Claim Construction” must also, for each term 

which any party contends is governed by 35 U.S.C. § 112(6), 

identify the structure(s), act(s), or material(s) corresponding to that 

term’s function.

(b) At the same time the parties exchange their respective “Preliminary 

Claim Constructions,” each party must also identify all references 

from the specification or prosecution history that support its 

proposed construction and designate any supporting extrinsic 

evidence including, without limitation, dictionary definitions, 

citations to learned treatises and prior art, and testimony of 

percipient and expert witnesses. Extrinsic evidence must be 

identified by production number or by producing a copy if not 

previously produced. With respect to any supporting witness, 

percipient or expert, the identifying party must also provide a 

description of the substance of that witness’ proposed testimony 

that includes a listing of any opinions to be rendered in connection 

with claim construction.

(c) The parties must then meet and confer for the purposes of 

narrowing the issues and finalizing preparation of a Joint Claim 

Construction and Prehearing Statement.

4-3. Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement

The parties must complete and file a Joint Claim Construction and 

Prehearing Statement, containing the following information:

(a) The construction of those terms on which the parties agree;

(b) Each party’s proposed construction of each disputed term, together 

with an identification of all references from the specification or 

prosecution history that support that construction, and an 

identification of any extrinsic evidence known to the party on 

which it intends to rely either to support its proposed construction 

or to oppose any other party’s proposed construction, including, 

but not limited to, as permitted by law, dictionary definitions, 

citations to learned treatises and prior art, and testimony of 

percipient and expert witnesses;

(c) An identification of the terms whose construction will be most 

significant to the resolution of the case up to a maximum of 10.

The parties must also identify any term among the 10 whose 

construction will be case or claim dispositive. If the parties cannot 

agree on the 10 most significant terms, the parties must identify 

the ones which they do agree are most significant and then they 

may evenly divide the remainder with each party identifying what it 

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 12 of 20
believes are the remaining most significant terms. However, the 

total terms identified by all parties as most significant cannot 

exceed 10. For example, in a case involving two parties, if the 

parties agree upon the identification of five terms as most 

significant, each may only identify two additional terms as most 

significant; if the parties agree upon eight such terms, each party 

may only identify only one additional term as most significant.

(d) The anticipated length of time necessary for the Claim 

Construction Hearing;

(e) Whether any party proposes to call one or more witnesses at the 

Claim Construction Hearing, the identity of each such witness, and 

for each witness, a summary of his or her testimony including, for 

any expert, each opinion to be offered related to claim 

construction; and

(f) Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the parties must provide 

the Court with a tutorial on the technology at issue no later than 

the date on which the opening claim construction briefs are due.

The tutorial should focus on the technology at issue. It is not 

appropriate to present argument during the technology tutorial.

The parties may propose the format for the tutorial, including 

submitting DVDs of not more than 30 minutes explaining the 

technology, or at an in-court proceeding.

4-4. Completion of Claim Construction Discovery

The parties must complete all discovery relating to claim construction, 

including any depositions with respect to claim construction of any 

witnesses, including experts, identified in the Preliminary Claim 

Construction statement (Patent Rule 4-2) or Joint Claim Construction 

and Prehearing Statement (Patent Rule 4-3).

4-5. Claim Construction Briefs 

Any party claiming patent infringement must serve and file an opening 

claim construction brief and any evidence supporting its claim 

construction. Any party asserting invalidity or unenforceability must

serve and file a brief and any evidence supporting its claim of invalidly or 

unenforceability. Any motion for summary judgment on invalidity or 

unenforceability must be made at this time.

4-7. Claim Construction Hearing

Subject to the convenience of the Court’s calendar, approximately three 

weeks following submission of the reply brief specified in Patent Rule 4-

5(c), the Court will conduct a Claim Construction Hearing, to the extent 

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 13 of 20
the parties or the Court believe a hearing is necessary for construction of 

the claims at issue.

4-8. Good-faith Participation

A failure to make a good-faith effort to narrow the instances of disputed 

terms or otherwise participate in the meet and confer process of any of 

the provisions of Section 4 may expose counsel to sanctions, including 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1927. 

Done and ordered in chambers, at Miami, Florida, on July 23, 2020.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Robert N. Scola, Jr.

United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 14 of 20
United States District Court

for the

Southern District of Florida

DeCurtis LLC, Plaintiff,

v.

Carnival Corporation, Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 20-22945-Civ-Scola

Protective Order

The Court recognizes that the parties to this case may request or 

produce information involving trade secrets, confidential research and 

development, or confidential commercial information. If this information is 

disclosed it is likely to cause harm to the party producing the information.

Accordingly, the Court enters the following protective order under Federal Rule 

of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1) and orders as follows:

1. Definitions:

a. “Party” means a named party in this case. “Person” means an 

individual or an entity.

b. “Producer” means a person who produces information via the 

discovery process in this case.

c. “Recipient” means a person who receives information via the 

discovery process in this case.

d. “Confidential” information is information concerning a person’s 

business operations, processes, and technical and development 

information within the scope of Rule 26(c)(1)(G), the disclosure of 

which is likely to harm that person’s competitive position, or the

disclosure of which would contravene an obligation of 

confidentiality to a third person or to a Court.

e. “Highly Confidential” information is information within the scope of 

Rule 26(c)(1)(G) that is current or future business or technical 

trade secrets and plans more sensitive or strategic than 

Confidential information, the disclosure of which is likely to 

significantly harm that person’s competitive position, or the 

disclosure of which would contravene an obligation of 

confidentiality to a third person or to a Court.

f. Information is not Confidential or Highly Confidential if it is 

disclosed in a printed publication, is known to the public, was 

known to the recipient without obligation of confidentiality before 

the producer disclosed it, or is or becomes known to the recipient 

by means not constituting a breach of this Order. Information is 

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 15 of 20
likewise not Confidential or Highly Confidential if a person lawfully 

obtained it independently of this litigation.

2. Designation of information as Confidential or Highly Confidential:

a. A person’s designation of information as Confidential or Highly 

Confidential means that the person believes in good faith, upon 

reasonable inquiry, that the information qualifies as such.

b. A person designates information in a document or thing as 

Confidential or Highly Confidential by clearly and prominently 

marking it on its face as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY

CONFIDENTIAL.” A producer may make documents or things 

containing Confidential or Highly Confidential information 

available for inspection and copying without marking them as

confidential without forfeiting a claim of confidentiality, so long as 

the producer causes copies of the documents or things to be 

marked as Confidential or Highly Confidential before providing

them to the recipient.

c. A person designates information in deposition testimony as 

Confidential or Highly Confidential by stating on the record at the 

deposition that the information is Confidential or Highly 

Confidential or by advising the opposing party and the 

stenographer and videographer in writing, within 14 days after 

receipt of the deposition transcript, that the information is 

Confidential or Highly Confidential.

d. A person’s failure to designate a document, thing, or testimony as 

Confidential or Highly Confidential does not constitute forfeiture of 

a claim of confidentiality as to any other document, thing, or 

testimony.

e. A person who has designated information as Confidential or Highly 

Confidential may withdraw the designation by written notification 

to all parties in the case.

f. If a party disputes a producer’s designation of information as 

Confidential or Highly Confidential, the party must notify the 

producer in writing of the basis for the dispute, identifying the 

specific document[s] or thing[s] as to which the designation is 

disputed and proposing a new designation for such materials. The 

party and the producer must then meet and confer to attempt to 

resolve the dispute without involvement of the Court. If they 

cannot resolve the dispute, the proposed new designation will be 

applied 14 days after notice of the dispute unless within that 14-

day period the producer files a motion with the Court to maintain 

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 16 of 20
the producer’s designation. The producer bears the burden of 

proving that the information is properly designated as Confidential 

or Highly Confidential. The information will remain subject to the 

producer’s Confidential or Highly Confidential designation until the 

Court rules on the dispute. A party’s failure to contest a 

designation of information as Confidential or Highly Confidential is 

not an admission that the information was properly designated as 

such.

3. Use and disclosure of Confidential or Highly Confidential information:

a. Confidential and Highly Confidential information may be used 

exclusively for purposes of this litigation, subject to the restrictions 

of this order.

b. Absent written permission from the producer or further order by 

the Court, the recipient may not disclose Confidential information 

to any person other than the following: (i) a party’s outside counsel 

of record, including necessary paralegal, secretarial and clerical

personnel assisting such counsel; (ii) a party’s in‐house counsel; 

(iii) a party’s officers and employees directly involved in this case 

whose access to the information is reasonably required to 

supervise, manage, or participate in this case; (iv) a stenographer 

and videographer recording testimony concerning the information; 

(v) subject to the provisions of paragraph 4(d) of this order, experts 

and consultants and their staff whom a party employs for purposes 

of this litigation only; and (vi) the Court and personnel assisting 

the Court.

c. Absent written permission from the producer or further order by 

the Court, the recipient may not disclose Highly Confidential 

information to any person other than those identified in paragraph 

3(b)( i), (iv), (v), and (vi).

d. A party may not disclose Confidential or Highly Confidential 

information to an expert or consultant pursuant to paragraph 3(b) 

or 3(c) of this order until after the expert or consultant has signed 

an undertaking in the form of Appendix 1 to this Order. The party

obtaining the undertaking must serve it on all other parties within 

14 days after its execution. At least 14 days before the first 

disclosure of Confidential or Highly Confidential information to an 

expert or consultant (or member of their staff), the party proposing 

to make the disclosure must serve the producer with a written 

identification of the expert or consultant and a copy of his or her 

curriculum vitae. If the producer has good cause to object to the 

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 17 of 20
disclosure (which does not include challenging the qualifications of 

the expert or consultant), it must serve the party proposing to 

make the disclosure with a written objection within 14 days after 

service of the identification. Unless the parties resolve the dispute 

within 14 days after service of the objection, the producer must 

move the Court promptly for a ruling, and the Confidential or

Highly Confidential information may not be disclosed to the expert 

or consultant without the Court’s approval.

e. Notwithstanding paragraph 3(a) and (b), a party may disclose 

Confidential or Highly Confidential information to: (i) any employee 

or author of the producer; (ii) any person, no longer affiliated with 

the producer, who authored the information in whole or in part; 

and (iii) any person who received the information before this case 

was filed.

f. A party who wishes to disclose Confidential or Highly Confidential 

information to a person not authorized under paragraph 3(b) or 

3(c) must first make a reasonable attempt to obtain the producer’s 

permission. If the party is unable to obtain permission, it may seek

the Court’s permission.

4. Copies: A party producing documents as part of discovery must, upon 

request, furnish the requesting party with one copy of the documents it 

requests, at the requesting party’s expense. Before copying, the parties 

must agree upon the rate at which the requesting party will be charged 

for copying.

5. Inadvertent Disclosure: Inadvertent disclosures of material protected by 

the attorney‐client privilege or the work product doctrine will be handled 

in accordance with Federal Rule of Evidence 502.

6. Filing with the Court: This protective order does not, by itself, authorize 

the filing of any document under seal. No document may be filed under 

seal without prior leave of court. A party wishing to file under seal a 

document containing Confidential or Highly Confidential information 

must move the Court, consistent with Local Rule 5.4 and before the due 

date for the document, for permission to file the document under seal. If 

a party obtains permission to file a document under seal, it must also 

(unless excused by the Court) file a public‐record version that excludes 

any Confidential or Highly Confidential information.

7. Document Disposal: Upon the conclusion of this case, each party must 

return to the producer all documents and copies of documents 

containing the producer’s Confidential and Highly Confidential 

information, and must destroy all notes, memoranda, or other materials 

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 18 of 20
derived from or in any way revealing confidential or highly confidential 

information. Alternatively, if the producer agrees, the party may destroy 

all documents and copies of documents containing the producer’s 

Confidential or Highly Confidential information. The party returning or 

destroying the producer’s Confidential and Highly Confidential 

information must promptly certify in writing its compliance with the 

requirements of this paragraph. Notwithstanding the requirements of 

this paragraph, a party and its counsel may retain one complete set of all 

documents filed with the Court, remaining subject to all requirements of 

this order.

8. Survival of obligations: This order’s obligations regarding Confidential 

and Highly Confidential information survive the conclusion of this case.

Done and ordered in chambers, at Miami, Florida, on July 23, 2020.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Robert N. Scola, Jr.

United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 19 of 20
Appendix 1

United States District Court

for the

Southern District of Florida

DeCurtis LLC, Plaintiff,

v.

Carnival Corporation, Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 20-22945-Civ-Scola

Undertaking of [insert name]

I, [insert person’s name], state the following under penalties of perjury as 

provided by law:

I have been retained by [insert party’s name] as an expert or consultant 

in connection with this case. I will be receiving Confidential [and Highly 

Confidential] information that is covered by the Court’s protective order dated 

[fill in date]. I have read the Court’s protective order and understand that the 

Confidential [and Highly Confidential] information is provided pursuant to the 

terms and conditions in that order.

I agree to be bound by the Court’s protective order. I agree to use the 

Confidential [and Highly Confidential] information solely for purposes of this 

case. I understand that neither the Confidential [and Highly Confidential] 

information nor any notes concerning that information may be disclosed to 

anyone that is not bound by the Court’s protective order. I agree to return the 

Confidential [and Highly Confidential] information and any notes concerning 

that information to the attorney for [insert name of retaining party] or to 

destroy the information and any notes at that attorney’s request.

I submit to the jurisdiction of the Court that issued the protective order 

for purposes of enforcing that order. I give up any objections I might have to 

the Court’s jurisdiction over me or to the propriety of venue in that Court.

_____________________________

 Signature

Subscribed and sworn to

before me this _____ day

of ____________, 20_____

_______________________

Notary Public

Case 1:20-cv-22945-RNS Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/23/2020 Page 20 of 20