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

PROSKAUER ROSE LLP

Anthony J. Oncidi (SBN 118135)

aoncidi@proskauer.com

Jeremy M. Mittman (SBN 248854)

jmittman@proskauer.com

Pietro A. Deserio (SBN 309230)

pdeserio@proskauer.com

2049 Century Park East, 32nd Floor

Los Angeles, California 90067-3206

Telephone: (310) 557-2900

Facsimile: (310) 557-2193

ALSTON & BIRD LLP

Christopher C. Marquardt

(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

chris.marquardt@alston.com

Isabella P. Lee (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

isabella.lee@alston.com

1201 West Peachtree Street, Suite 4900

Atlanta, GA 30309-3424

Telephone: (404) 881-7000

Facsimile: (404) 881-7777

Attorneys for Plaintiff INSIGHT GLOBAL, LLC

PROCOPIO, CORY, HARGREAVES &

SAVITCH LLP

Tyler M. Paetkau (SBN 146305)

tyler.paetkau@procopio.com

Olga Savage (SBN 252009)

olga.savage@procopio.com

117 S. California Ave

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1106

(650) 645-9027 (office)

(650) 687-8323 (fax)

BERMAN FINK VAN HORN P.C.

Benjamin Fink, pro hac vice

bfink@bfvlaw.com

3475 Piedmont Rd NE Suite 1100

Atlanta, GA 30305

Phone: (404) 261-7588

Fax: (404) 233-1943

Attorneys for Defendant BEACON HILL STAFFING GROUP, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

INSIGHT GLOBAL, LLC, a Delaware limited

liability company,

Plaintiff,

vs.

BEACON HILL STAFFING GROUP, LLC, a

Massachusetts limited liability company,

Defendant.

CASE NO. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

[PROPOSED]

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Re: Dkt. 33

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 1 of 18
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

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff INSIGHT GLOBAL, LLC on

the one hand, and Defendant BEACON HILL STAFFING GROUP, LLC on the other

(collectively “the Parties”), by and through their respective counsel of record, that in order to

facilitate the exchange of information and documents which may be subject to confidentiality

limitations on disclosure due to federal laws, state laws, and/or privacy rights, and in order to

secure the entry of a protective order limiting the review, copying, dissemination and filing of

confidential and/or proprietary documents and information to be produced by the Parties and their

respective counsel or by any non-party in the course of discovery in this Litigation to the extent set

forth below, the Parties, by, between and among their respective counsel, stipulate as follows.

Disclosure and discovery activity in this Litigation 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 warranted.

The materials to be exchanged throughout the course of the litigation between the Parties may

contain trade secret or other confidential research, personnel, cost, price, marketing or other

commercial information, as is contemplated by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(7). Further,

the Parties recognize that at least some of the documents and information (“materials”) being

sought through discovery in the above-captioned action are, for competitive reasons, normally

kept confidential by the Parties. Thus, the Parties have agreed to be bound by the terms of this

Stipulated Protective Order (“Order”) in this Litigation to protect the confidentiality of such

materials as much as practical during and after the litigation.

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 materials that are entitled to confidential treatment under the

applicable legal principles. The Parties further acknowledge that this Order does not entitle them

to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 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.

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 2 of 18
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

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

DEFINITIONS

The following definitions shall apply in this Order:

1. The term “Attorneys’ Eyes Only Information” means Confidential Information of a

type that could be used by a competitor in business competition with the Producing Party, and thus

cannot be shared with individuals who are not Counsel of a Party.

2. The term “Confidential Information” means non-public, commercially sensitive or

proprietary information that is treated by its owner as confidential.

3. The term “Counsel” means Outside Counsel and In-House Counsel.

4. The term “Designated Information” means Confidential Information and/or

Attorneys’ Eyes Only Information that has been produced in this Litigation and designated by a

Party as “Confidential” or “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” pursuant to the provisions of this Order.

5. The term “Independent Expert” means a person, who is not an employee of a Party

or scheduled to become an employee in the near future, and who is retained or employed as a bona

fide consultant or expert for purposes of this Litigation, either full or part-time, by or at the

direction of Counsel for a Party. The term “Independent Expert” excludes lawyer representatives

of a Party who are not In-House Counsel or Outside Counsel for a Party.

6. The term “In-House Counsel” means in-house attorneys who are employees for a

Party. For purposes of this Insight Global, LLC vs. Beacon Hill Staffing Group, LLC case, “InHouse Counsel” also includes Mr. Robert W. Levy, Esq. of Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott

LLC as long as Mr. Levy is serving as outside general counsel to Beacon Hill.

7. The term “Litigation” means the above-captioned case styled Insight Global, LLC

vs. Beacon Hill Staffing Group, LLC, Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF, and its related case styled

Barker vs. Insight Global, LLC et al. vs. Barker, Case No. 5:16-cv-07186-BLF, and the

administrative proceeding between John Barker and Plaintiff Insight Global, LLC.

8. The term “Outside Counsel” means counsel who has made an appearance in this

Litigation for a Party, and includes their paralegals, agents, and support staff.

9. The terms “Party or Parties” means Plaintiff Insight Global, LLC and Defendant

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 3 of 18
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

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

Beacon Hill Staffing Group, LLC.

10. The term “Producing Party” means the person or entity that produces documents or

information, or provides testimony, in this Litigation.

11. The term “Receiving Party” means a Party to whom documents or information

are/is provided in this Litigation by a Producing Party.

11. The term “Redacted Information” means Attorneys’ Eyes Only Information that is

highly sensitive competitive information relating to a Party or Producing Party’s customers that

such Party or Producing Party may redact prior to production to a Party. Customer names shall be

excluded from such redaction.

DUTY TO DESIGNATE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

12. This Order shall apply to all Designated Information produced during discovery in

this Litigation by a Party or a Producing Party. It is the responsibility of a Party or Producing Party

to designate such information as “CONFIDENTIAL” (for Confidential Information) or

“CONFIDENTIAL — ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” (for Attorneys’ Eyes Only Information)

pursuant to the provisions of this Order, and all such designations shall be made in good faith.

RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF DESIGNATED INFORMATION.

13. All Designated Information shall be used only for the purpose of this Litigation and

not for any other business, proceeding, litigation, or other purpose whatsoever. Further, such

information may not be disclosed to anyone except as provided in this Order.

14. Outside Counsel and In-House Counsel for a Receiving Party may give advice and

opinions to their client based on evaluation of Designated Information marked “Confidential —

Attorneys’ Eyes Only,” provided that such rendering of advice and opinions shall not reveal the

content of such Designated Information marked “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only” except by

prior written agreement with opposing counsel.

PERSONS WHO MAY RECEIVE MATERIALS DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL

INFORMATION

15. After Counsel for a Receiving Party has received material designated as

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 4 of 18
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

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

“Confidential” during the course of this Litigation, that Counsel may disclose it or make it

available only to other Counsel and the persons designated below (and, as explained below, only

after certain of those persons have reviewed this Order and signed the agreement attached hereto

as Exhibit A):

(a) an officer, director, or designated employee of a Party deemed necessary by

Counsel to aid in the prosecution, defense, or settlement of this Litigation, if he or she complies

with the provisions of Section 16;

(b) an Independent Expert (together with his or her support staff) retained by

Counsel to assist in the prosecution, defense, or settlement of this Litigation, if he or she complies

with the provisions of Section 16;

(c) the Court, including the Court’s administrative staff and clerical staff, only

upon a properly submitted motion pursuant to this Order;

(d) court reporters employed in this Litigation;

(e) agents of Counsel needed to perform various services such as, for example,

copying, drafting of exhibits, and support and management services, including vendors retained by

the Parties, or by Counsel, for the purpose of encoding, loading into a computer and storing and

maintaining for information control and retrieval purposes, transcripts of depositions, hearings,

trials, pleadings, exhibits marked by a Party, or attorneys’ work product, all of which may contain

Confidential Information;

(f) witnesses in any deposition or other proceeding of this Litigation who were

the author(s) of the material designated as “Confidential,” or who, based on independent evidence,

are shown to have been persons who have previously received a copy of such material, if he or she

complies with the provisions of Section 16;

(g) ADR Neutrals (e.g. Mediators) selected by the Parties to facilitate

alternative dispute resolution, including the ADR Neutral’s support staff; and

(h) any other persons as to whom Counsel for the Parties in writing, or on the

record during a deposition or other court proceeding, agree, if he or she complies with the

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 5 of 18
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

6

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

provisions of Section 16.

16. No person described in Paragraph 15(a) (representatives of a Party), Paragraph

15(b) (Independent Experts), Paragraph 15(f) (witnesses who had previously reviewed the

information) or Paragraph 15(h) (other persons as agreed by Counsel) shall be given access to

Confidential Information unless and until:

(a) he or she is given a copy of this Order, and its provisions are explained to

him or her by Counsel;

(b) he or she agrees not to disclose to anyone any Designated Information

except as permitted by this Order;

(c) he or she agrees not to make use of any such Designated Information other

than solely for purpose of this Litigation; and

(d) he or she acknowledges in writing by signing a document in the form of

Exhibit A attached hereto that he or she is fully conversant with the terms of this Order and agrees

to comply with it and be bound by it.

PERSONS WHO MAY RECEIVE MATERIALS DESIGNATED AS ATTORNEYS’ EYES

ONLY INFORMATION

17. Outside Counsel shall be a Party’s initial designee for receipt of Attorneys’ Eyes

Only Information. After Outside Counsel for a Receiving Party has received material designated

as “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only” during the course of this Insight Global, LLC vs.

Beacon Hill Staffing Group, LLC case, that Outside Counsel may disclose or make it available

only to In-House Counsel and the persons designated below (and, as explained below, only after

certain of those persons have reviewed this Order and signed the agreement attached hereto as

Exhibit A):

(a) an Independent Expert (together with his or her support staff) retained by

such Counsel to assist in the prosecution, defense, or settlement of this Litigation, if he or she

complies with the provisions of Section 18;

(b) the Court, including the Court’s administrative staff and clerical staff, only

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 6 of 18
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

7

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

upon a properly submitted motion pursuant to this Order;

(c) court reporters employed in this Litigation;

(d) agents of Outside Counsel needed to perform various services such as, for

example, copying, drafting of exhibits, and support and management services, including vendors

retained by the Parties, or by Outside Counsel, for the purpose of encoding, loading into a

computer and storing and maintaining for information control and retrieval purposes, transcripts of

depositions, hearings, trials, pleadings, exhibits marked by a Party, or attorneys’ work product, all

of which may contain material designated “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only”;

(e) witnesses in any deposition or other proceeding in this Litigation who were

the author(s) of the “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only” material, or who, based on

independent evidence, are shown to have been persons who have previously received a copy of

such material, if he or she complies with the provisions of Section 18;

(f) ADR Neutrals (e.g. Mediators) selected by the Parties to facilitate

alternative dispute resolution, including the ADR Neutral’s support staff; and

(g) any other persons as to whom Counsel for the Parties agree in writing or on

the record during a deposition or other court proceeding, if he or she complies with the provisions

of Section 18.

18. No person described in Paragraph 17(a) (Independent Experts), Paragraph 17(e)

(witnesses who had previously reviewed the information) or Paragraph 17(g) (other persons as

agreed by Counsel) shall be given access to Attorneys’ Eyes Only Information unless and until:

(a) he or she is given a copy of this Order, and its provisions are explained to

him or her by Counsel;

(b) he or she agrees not to disclose to anyone any Designated Information

except as permitted by this Order;

(c) he or she agrees not to make use of any such Designated Information other

than solely for purpose of this Litigation; and

(d) he or she acknowledges in writing by signing a document in the form of

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 7 of 18
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

8

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

Exhibit A attached hereto that he or she is fully conversant with the terms of this Order and agrees

to comply with it and be bound by it.

PROCEDURE FOR DESIGNATING WRITTEN DISCOVERY MATERIAL

19. If a document or transcript contains information considered Confidential

Information by a Party or Producing Party, such document or transcript shall be marked with the

legend “CONFIDENTIAL.” Such notation shall be placed on every page of each document so

designated.

20 If a document or transcript contains information considered Attorneys’ Eyes Only

Information by a Party or Producing Party, such document or transcript shall be marked with the

legend “CONFIDENTIAL — ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or “CONFIDENTIAL — AEO.”

Such notation shall be placed on every page of each document so designated.

21. If a document or transcript contains information considered to be Redacted

Information by a Party or Producing Party, such information shall be redacted using a black-out

method.

PROCEDURE FOR DESIGNATING TESTIMONY

22. Designated Information may be used in any deposition taken of (i) Producing Party

or its employees, and (ii) any person who is entitled to receive the information under this Order.

When such Designated Information is so used, the Party or Producing Party who made the

designation may notify the court reporter that the portion of the deposition involving such

Designated Information is being taken pursuant to this Order. Further, whenever any Designated

Information is to be discussed or disclosed in a deposition, any Party claiming confidentiality may

exclude from the room any person not entitled to receive such Designated Information pursuant to

the terms of this Order.

23. Information disclosed at a deposition or other testimony may be designated as

“Confidential,” “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only,” and/or “Redacted Information” at the

time of the deposition or testimony, or within thirty (30) days following receipt of the transcript,

and shall be subject to the provisions of this Order.

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 8 of 18
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

9

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

24. Information disclosed during a deposition or other testimony may also be

designated as “Confidential,” “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only,” and or “Redacted

Information” by notifying the other Party, in writing, within thirty (30) days after receipt of the

transcript, of the specific pages and line numbers of the transcript that should also be so

designated.

25. Unless otherwise agreed on the record of the deposition or other testimony, all

transcripts shall be treated as “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only” for a period of thirty (30)

days after their receipt, and the transcript shall not be disclosed by a non-designating Party to

persons other than those persons approved under this Order to review documents or materials

designated “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only” on behalf of that non-designating Party.

FILING DESIGNATED INFORMATION WITH COURT

26. 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 documents designated “Confidential” and “Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” A

Party that seeks to file under seal any Designated Information must comply with Civil Local Rule

79-5. Designated Information may only be filed under seal pursuant to a court order authorizing

the sealing of the specific Designated Information at issue. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5, a

sealing order will issue only upon a request establishing that the Designated Information at issue is

privileged, protectable as a trade secret, or otherwise entitled to protection under the law. If a

Receiving Party's request to file Designated Information under seal pursuant to Civil Local Rule

79-5(d) is denied by the court, then the Receiving Party may file the information in the public

record pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(e) unless otherwise instructed by the court, provided,

however, the Receiving Party and the Designating Party will first meet and confer in good faith

regarding redaction of Designated Information to the minimum necessary for disclosure before

filing in the public record.

PROCEDURE FOR CHALLENGING DESIGNATIONS

28. A Party shall not be obligated to challenge the propriety of a designation as

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 9 of 18
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

10

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

“Confidential” or “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only” at the time such designation is made,

and a failure to do so shall not preclude a subsequent challenge.

29. In the event that any Party disagrees at any stage of this Litigation with the

designation by the designating Party or Producing Party of any information as “Confidential,”

“Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only,” and/or redactions applied to Redacted Information, the

Party objecting shall first try to resolve such disagreement with the Producing Party in good faith

on an informal basis. Specifically, the Challenging Party shall initiate the dispute resolution

process by providing written notice, sent by e-mail to all counsel of record, of each designation it

is challenging and describing in detail the basis for each challenge. The Parties shall attempt to

resolve each challenge in good faith and must begin the process by conferring directly (in voice to

voice dialogue, if possible) within 14 days of the date of service of the e-mail notice. In

conferring, the Challenging Party must explain in detail the basis for its belief that the

confidentiality designation was not proper and must give the Producing Party an opportunity to

review the designated material, to reconsider the circumstances, and, if no change in designation is

offered, to explain the basis for the chosen designation. A Challenging Party may proceed to the

next stage of the challenge process only if it has engaged in this meet and confer process first or

establishes that the Producing Party was unwilling to participate in the meet and confer process in

a timely manner.

30. If the disagreement cannot be resolved on an informal basis, parties shall comply

with the undersigned’s Standing Order re Civil Discovery Disputes (and with Civil Local Rule 79-

5, if applicable). Failure by the Producing Party to seek court intervention within the period set

out in Standing Order Section 2.D. may be deemed to waive the confidentiality designation for

each challenged designation unless the Producing Party can establish good cause for such delay.

31. The burden shall be on the Party who designated the material as Confidential

Information or Attorneys’ Eyes Only Information to persuade the Court that the designation is

necessary and appropriate. All parties shall continue to afford the material in question the level of

protection to which it is entitled under the Producing Party’s designation until the Court rules on

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 10 of 18
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

11

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

the challenge.

CORRECTING OMITTED OR IMPROPER DESIGNATIONS

32. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, if a Party or Producing Party

through inadvertence or mistake produces any information without marking it with the legend

“Confidential” or “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only,” designates it with an incorrect level of

confidentiality, or inadvertently produces information without redaction, a Party or the Producing

Party may give written notice to the Receiving Party that the document, information, or testimony

contains Designated Information and should be treated as such in accordance with the provisions

of this Order. Upon receipt of such notice, and upon receipt of properly marked materials, the

Receiving Party shall (i) return said unmarked or incorrectly marked materials and not retain

copies thereof, (ii) treat such documents, information, or transcripts as Designated Information,

and (iii) cooperate in restoring the confidentiality of such Designated Information.

33. The Receiving Party shall not be responsible for the disclosure or other distribution

of belatedly-labeled Designated Information as to such disclosure or distribution that occurred

prior to the receipt of such notification of a claim of confidentiality, and any such disclosure or

distribution shall not be deemed to be a waiver or a violation of this Order.

INADVERTENT DISCLOSURE OF PRIVILEGED INFORMATION

34. If information subject to a claim of attorney-client privilege or work-product

immunity is inadvertently produced, such production shall in no way prejudice or otherwise

constitute a waiver of, or estoppel as to, any such claim. If a Party has inadvertently produced

information subject to a claim of immunity or privilege, upon request, such information shall be

returned promptly and, if a document, all copies of that document shall be destroyed. The Party

returning such information may thereafter move the Court for an order compelling production of

such information upon a good faith basis for challenging the privilege or protection but may not

assert, as a basis for compelling production, waiver based on its inadvertent production in the first

instance.

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 11 of 18
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

12

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

NO WAIVER OF OBJECTIONS OR ADDITIONAL REQUESTS FOR PROTECTION

35. The production of information pursuant to the terms of this Order shall not

constitute an admission by a Party that the information is relevant or admissible for purposes of

this Litigation. It is not the intention of this Order to fully address discovery objections or to

preclude any Party, including the Producing Party, from seeking other relief or protective orders

from the Court as may be appropriate.

36. This Order shall not abrogate or diminish any contractual, statutory, or other legal

obligation or right of any Party to this Order, or as to any non-party, with respect to any

Designated Information. The fact that information is designated “Confidential” or “Confidential

— Attorneys’ Eyes Only” under this Order shall not be deemed to be determinative of what a trier

of fact may determine to be confidential or proprietary. This Order shall be without prejudice to

the right of any Party or person to bring before the Court the question of:

(a) whether any particular document, information, or transcript is or is not

Designated Information;

(b) whether any particular document, information, or transcript is or is not

entitled to a greater or lesser degree of protection than provided hereunder; or

(c) whether any particular document, information, or transcript is or is not

relevant to any issue in this Litigation; provided that in doing so the Party complies with the

foregoing procedures.

APPLICATION TO INFORMATION PRODUCED BY NON-PARTIES

37. A non-party to this Litigation may designate its testimony or its information

produced for purposes of this Litigation as “Confidential” or “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes

Only,” and such Designated Information produced by a non-party in connection with this

Litigation is protected by the remedies and relief provided by this Order.

38. Similarly, a Party may designate testimony or information regarding its business

operations that is produced by a non-party as “Confidential,” “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes

Only,” and/or “Redacted Information.”

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 12 of 18
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

13

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

39. To protect its own Designated Information, the Producing Party may require a nonparty to execute a document in the form of Exhibit A prior to receiving the information.

PUBLIC INFORMATION

40. This Order is not intended to apply to information that, before disclosure, is

properly in the possession or knowledge of the Receiving Party, or that is public knowledge. The

restrictions contained in this Order shall not apply to information that is, or after disclosure

becomes, public knowledge other than by an unauthorized act or omission of the Receiving Party

or another third party, or that is legitimately acquired from a source not subject to this Order.

DESIGNATED INFORMATION SUBPOENAED OR ORDERED PRODUCED IN

OTHER LITIGATION

41. If a Party is served with a subpoena or a court order issued in other litigation that

compels disclosure of any information or items designated in this Litigation as “Confidential,”

“Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only,” and/or “Redacted Information,” that Party must:

(a) promptly notify in writing the Producing Party. Such notification shall

include a copy of the subpoena or court order;

(b) promptly notify in writing the party who caused the subpoena or order to

issue in the other litigation, with a copy to the Producing Party, that some or all of the

material covered by the subpoena or order is subject to this Protective Order. Such

notification shall include a copy of this Order; and

(c) cooperate with respect to all reasonable procedures sought to be pursued by

the Producing Party whose Designated Information may be affected.

If the Producing Party timely seeks a protective order in another action, the Party served

with the subpoena or court order shall not produce any information designated in this Litigation as

“Confidential,” “Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only,” and/or “Redacted Information,” before a

determination by the court from which the subpoena or order issued, unless the Party has obtained

the Producing Party’s permission. The Producing Party shall bear the burden and expense of

seeking protection in that court of its confidential material – and nothing in these provisions

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 13 of 18
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

14

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

should be construed as authorizing or encouraging a Receiving Party in this Litigation to disobey a

lawful directive from another court.

RETURN OF DESIGNATED INFORMATION AT END OF LITIGATION

42. Within sixty (60) days following the conclusion of this Litigation (including

appeals) as to each Receiving Party: all information designated as Designated Information, except

such documents or information which incorporate or are incorporated into attorney work product

(a single copy of which may be retained in Counsel’s file), shall, upon request, be returned to the

Producing Party, or disposed of pursuant to the instructions of the Producing Party. Whether the

Designated Information 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 affirms that the Receiving Party has not retained any copies, abstracts,

compilations, summaries or any other format reproducing or capturing any of the Designated

Information. 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 Designated Information.

DURATION OF PROTECTIVE ORDER

43. Even after final disposition of this Litigation, the confidentiality obligations

imposed by this Order shall remain in effect until a Producing Party 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 Litigation, with or without prejudice; and (2) final judgment herein

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

Litigation, including the time limits for filing any motions or applications for extension of time

pursuant to applicable law. For a period of six months after final disposition of this Litigation, this

court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of this order.

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 14 of 18
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

15

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

MODIFICATION OF PROTECTIVE ORDER

44. This Order is without prejudice to the right of a Party hereto to seek relief from the

Court, upon good cause shown, from any of the provisions or restrictions provided herein.

Dated: September 29, 2017 /s/ Christopher C. Marquardt

Christopher C. Marquardt (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

Isabella P. Lee (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

ALSTON & BIRD LLP

Anthony J. Oncidi

Jeremy M. Mittman

Pietro A. Deserio

PROSKAUER ROSE LLP

Attorneys for Plaintiff

INSIGHT GLOBAL, LLC

Dated: September 29, 2017 /s/ Tyler M. Paetkau

Tyler M. Paetkau (SBN 146305)

Olga Savage (SBN 252009)

PROCOPIO, CORY, HARGREAVES & SAVITCH

LLP

Attorneys for Defendant

BEACON HILL STAFFING GROUP, LLC

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 15 of 18
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

16

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

FILER’S ATTESTATION

(Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3))

I, Christopher C. Marquardt, hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this document

has been obtained from all signatories.

Executed September 29, 2017, in Atlanta, GA.

/s Christopher C. Marquardt

CHRISTOPHER C. MARQUARDT

Georgia Bar No. 471150 (admitted pro hac vice)

ISABELLA P. LEE

Georgia Bar No. 289022 (admitted pro hac vice)

ALSTON & BIRD LLP

1201 West Peachtree Street

Atlanta, GA 30309-3424

Telephone: (404) 881-7000

Facsimile: (404) 881-7777

Counsel for Plaintiff

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 16 of 18
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

17

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

EXHIBIT A

ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT

I, _______________________, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the

United States that:

1. My address is: ___________________________________.

2. My present employer is: ___________________________.

3. My present occupation or job description is:____________

_____________________________________________________.

I HEREBY CERTIFY AND AGREE that I have read and understand the terms of the

Stipulated Protective Order (the “Order”) entered in Insight Global, LLC v. Beacon Hill Staffing

Group, LLC, Case No. 16-cv-00309-BLF pending in the United States District Court for the

Northern District of California (the “Court”). I agree that I will not disclose any documents or

information received by me pursuant to the Order, except for purposes directly related to this

Litigation, as explicitly allowed by said Order, and I agree to be bound by the terms and

conditions of this Order unless and until modified by further order of the Court.

I hereby consent to the jurisdiction of the Court for purposes of enforcing the Order. I

understand that I am to retain all copies of any of the materials I receive which have been labeled

as Designated Information in a safe and confidential place in a manner consistent with the Order,

and that all copies are to remain in my custody until I have completed my assigned or legal duties,

whereupon the copies are to be returned or destroyed as specified in the Order.

I acknowledge that such return or the subsequent destruction of such materials shall not

relieve me from any of the continuing obligations imposed upon me by the Order.

__________________________

Signature

__________________________

Dated

__________________________

Printed Name

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 17 of 18
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

18

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case No. 5:17-cv-00309-BLF

[PROPOSED] ORDER

FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, the Court hereby approves this Stipulated

Protective Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

____________________________________

THE HON. HOWARD R. LLOYD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

October 2, 2017

Case 5:17-cv-00309-BLF Document 34 Filed 10/02/17 Page 18 of 18