IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

BRIAN RATCLIFF,

Plaintiff,

v.

MOUNT CARMEL HEALTH SYSTEM,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 2:18-cv-00745 

JUDGE ALGENON MARBLEY

MAGISTRATE JUDGE KIMBERLY 

JOLSON

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Plaintiff Brian Ratcliff (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Mount Carmel Health System 

(“Defendant”) by the stipulation of their respective undersigned counsel, have agreed to the entry 

of a protective order and to the terms thereof:

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

1. For the purpose of this Order, “Confidential Information” shall mean any 

document or other information produced by either Plaintiff or Defendant that is marked 

“Confidential” and is reasonably and in good faith considered to include patient, and/or 

employee information and/or personnel, medical, and/or financial records related to any 

individual, or proprietary or trade secret information with respect to Defendant.

2. In the event that either party challenges another party’s confidential 

designation, counsel shall make a good faith effort to resolve the dispute in accordance 

with Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and, absent a resolution, the 

challenging party may thereafter seek resolution from the Magistrate Judge. If either 

party disputes the other party’s designation of a document as confidential, that the burden 

Case: 2:18-cv-00745-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 11 Filed: 11/13/18 Page: 1 of 5 PAGEID #: 42
2

of proof resides with the party asserting confidentiality to prove that it deserves such 

treatment. That when documents cease to be secret and confidential that there are no 

longer any requirements to preserve their confidentiality. That no documents that are 

publicly available can be stamped as confidential, such as documents filed with 

government agencies but available under the Freedom of Information Act or similar laws, 

annual reports of public corporations, and other similar information.

3. Confidential Information shall not be disclosed by any recipient to any 

person other than:

(a) The parties and counsel of record in this case, including in-house and 

outside counsel involved in this case and their legal staffs. The parties 

agree to limit disclosure of Confidential Information and the information 

contained therein to those staff persons necessary to prosecute or defend 

this action;

(b) Experts or consultants retained by counsel for the preparation or trial of 

this action;

(c) Any actual or proposed deponent or witness, only if such information is 

necessary to prepare that witness to testify at deposition or trial, or to 

question the witness at deposition or trial;

(d) The District Court Judge and his staff;

(e) The Magistrate Judge and her staff; 

(f) Any third party who is engaged for the purpose of copying, organizing, 

converting, storing, or retrieving documents potentially subject to this 

Protective Order (i.e., a copy service); and

Case: 2:18-cv-00745-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 11 Filed: 11/13/18 Page: 2 of 5 PAGEID #: 43
3

(g) Any videographers and court reporters.

4. No Confidential Information shall be used by any recipient for any 

purpose whatsoever other than for the preparation and trial of this action and any 

appellate proceedings relating thereto.

5. No person or entity bound by this Order shall disclose any Confidential 

Information or discuss its contents except for the purposes stated herein, unless required 

to do so by law or compulsory legal process. If a party believes that disclosure of the 

other party’s Confidential Information is required by law or public policy, that party shall 

challenge the confidentiality designation pursuant to the procedures set forth in 

Paragraph 2 of this Order. If a party receives a subpoena or other compulsory legal 

process to which the other party’s Confidential Information is responsive, that party shall 

notify the party who owns the Confidential Information sufficiently in advance of the 

date upon which the disclosure is required to be made so that the party may seek Court 

intervention preventing the disclosure. Nothing in this Order shall be construed as 

requiring either party or its counsel to violate any law regarding disclosure of 

information.

6. Nothing herein shall be construed as a waiver of the right to object to the 

request for any information sought by way of discovery or to the admissibility of any 

testimony or evidence where such objections are based on grounds other than the fact that 

the testimony or evidence involves Confidential Information.

7. Nothing contained herein shall affect the rights of either Plaintiff or 

Defendant with respect to his or their own documents or information.

Case: 2:18-cv-00745-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 11 Filed: 11/13/18 Page: 3 of 5 PAGEID #: 44
4

8. Upon conclusion of the case (including the exhaustion of all appeals) and 

upon written request by an opposing party, each party shall return to an opposing party all 

originals and all copies of any Confidential Information obtained during the case, or shall 

certify that they have been destroyed with the exception that no pleading files, 

depositions, correspondence files, or other similar attorney work product and attorneyclient privilege files and documents need be dismantled in order to return confidential 

information and documents at the conclusion of the case. In lieu of returning said 

Confidential Information, counsel certifies, through his/her signature on this Order, that 

all reasonably precautions will be taken to ensure against disclosure of the Confidential 

Information after the termination of this action (including appeals).

9. No pleadings may be filed under seal with the court and that counsel

should attempt to minimize the filing of any exhibits under seal.

10. This Order is subject to modification by the Court upon application of 

either party.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

___________________________

Kimberly A. Jolson 

United States Magistrate District Judge

Agreed:

/s/ Rayl L. Stepter (permission to file given) /s/ Samuel E. Endicott

Rayl L. Stepter (0047505) M. J. Asensio (0030777), Trial Attorney

5650 Blazer Parkway Samuel E. Endicott (0094026)

Dublin, Ohio 43017 BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

Telephone: (614) 468-4100 200 Civic Center Drive, Suite 1200

Facsimile: (614) 468-4101 Columbus, Ohio 43215

raylstepter@stepterlaw.com Telephone: (614) 228-1541

Attorneys for Plaintiff masensio@bakerlaw.com

sendicott@bakerlaw.com

Attorneys for Defendant 

Case: 2:18-cv-00745-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 11 Filed: 11/13/18 Page: 4 of 5 PAGEID #: 45
5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on November 13, 2018, a copy of the foregoing was electronically 

filed. Notice of this filing will be sent to all parties, who are registered with the Court’s 

electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s system.

/s/ Samuel E. Endicott

An Attorney for Defendant 

Mount Carmel Health System

Case: 2:18-cv-00745-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 11 Filed: 11/13/18 Page: 5 of 5 PAGEID #: 46