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

John A. Yanchunis 

(admitted pro hac vice) 

jyanchunis@ForThePeople.com 

MORGAN & MORGAN 

COMPLEX LITIGATION 

GROUP

John A. Yanchunis 

201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor 

Tampa, Florida 33602 

Telephone: 813/223-5505 

813/223-5402 (fax) 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the 

Putative Class 

Ann Marie Mortimer (SBN 169077)

amortimer@hunton.com 

Jason J. Kim (SBN 221476) 

kimj@hunton.com 

Kirk A. Hornbeck (SBN 241708) 

khornbeck@hunton.com 

HUNTON & WILLIAMS LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000 

Los Angeles, California 90071-2627 

Telephone: (213) 532-2000 

Facsimile: (213) 532-2020 

Samuel A. Danon 

(admitted pro hac vice) 

sdanon@hunton.com 

John J. Delionado 

(admitted pro hac vice) 

jdelionado@hunton.com 

HUNTON & WILLIAMS LLP 

1111 Brickell Ave., Ste. 2500 

Miami, FL 33143 

Telephone: (305) 810-2500 

Facsimile: (305) 810-2460 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Yahoo! Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

IN RE: YAHOO! CUSTOMER DATA 

SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION 

________________________________

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 16-MD-02752-LHK

STIPULATED [PROPOSED] 

ORDER UNDER FEDERAL 

RULES OF EVIDENCE 502(d) 

AND (e)

 

Case 5:16-md-02752-LHK Document 75 Filed 03/27/17 Page 1 of 6
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. PURPOSE 

This Order under Federal Rules of Evidence 502(d) and (e) reflects the 

Parties’ agreement to protect certain privileged and otherwise protected 

documents, data (including electronically stored information) and other 

information, including without limitation, metadata (collectively, 

“Document(s)”) against claims of waiver. 

2. CLAWBACK NOTICE 

In the event that a producing party claims that it inadvertently produced 

Documents subject to a legally recognized claim of privilege or work-product 

protection, it shall provide written notice of the claim to the receiving party (a 

“Clawback Notice”), identifying the subject Documents. 

3. COVERED DOCUMENTS 

(a) For purposes of this Order, “Covered Documents” 

include: 

(i) Documents specified in a Clawback Notice that 

were produced fewer than thirty (30) days prior 

to receipt of the Clawback Notice by the 

receiving party; and 

(ii) Documents specified in the Clawback Notice 

up to 5% of the Documents in the production to 

which the Clawback Notice relates. 

(b) The producing party is not obligated to provide any

explanation or evidence regarding the reasonableness 

of efforts taken to prevent the production of Covered 

Documents. 

(c) The production of any Covered Document shall not 

result in the waiver of any privilege or other 

protection (including, without limitation, the attorneyCase 5:16-md-02752-LHK Document 75 Filed 03/27/17 Page 2 of 6
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 

client privilege, the work-product doctrine, the joint 

defense privilege, or other applicable privilege) 

associated with such Document as to the receiving 

party or any third parties, and shall not result in any 

waiver, including subject matter waiver, of any kind, 

in this or in any other state or federal proceeding. 

This Paragraph shall be interpreted to provide the 

maximum protection allowed by Federal Rule of 

Evidence 502(d) with regard to Covered Documents. 

4. NON-COVERED DOCUMENTS 

(a) With respect to Documents specified in a Clawback 

Notice that are not Covered Documents under this 

Order (“Non-Covered Documents”), Federal Rule of 

Evidence 502(b) shall apply. 

(b) With respect to Non-Covered Documents, a Clawback 

Notice must describe the steps taken to prevent 

production of the specified Documents, and the steps 

taken to rectify the production of the Documents, to 

enable the receiving party to make a reasoned 

decision as to whether it wishes to challenge the 

reasonableness and/or timeliness of such steps. 

5. PROCEDURES FOLLOWING CLAWBACK NOTICE 

(a) Upon receipt of a Clawback Notice (regardless of 

whether the receiving party agrees with the producing 

party’s claim of privilege) or upon determining that 

information it received is privileged or work-productprotected, the receiving party must make reasonable

efforts to promptly return, sequester, and/or destroy 

Case 5:16-md-02752-LHK Document 75 Filed 03/27/17 Page 3 of 6
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 

the Document(s), all copies thereof, and any notes that 

reproduce, copy, or otherwise disclose the substance 

of the information for which privilege is claimed, and 

notify the producing party when this is complete. 

(b) If a receiving party challenges a claim that a 

Document specified in a Clawback Notice is 

privileged or work-product-protected, the receiving

party shall notify the producing party of its positions 

within 14 days of receiving the Clawback Notice 

asserting the claim. Within 14 days of the producing 

party receiving notification of the dispute, the parties 

shall meet and confer in an effort to resolve their

disagreement. If the parties are unable to resolve their 

disagreement, the parties may submit the issue to the 

Court for a determination, and may submit the 

document(s) at issue for in camera review. 

(c) If a receiving party challenges a Clawback Notice 

pertaining to a Non-Covered Document on the ground 

that the production of the Document was not 

inadvertent by the producing party, that the producing 

party did not take reasonable steps to prevent the 

production of the Document, or that the producing 

party did not take reasonable or timely steps to rectify 

the production of the Document, the receiving party

shall notify the producing party of its positions within 

14 days of receiving the Clawback Notice. Within 14 

days of the producing party receiving notification of 

the dispute, the parties shall meet and confer in an 

Case 5:16-md-02752-LHK Document 75 Filed 03/27/17 Page 4 of 6
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 

effort to resolve their disagreement. If the parties are 

unable to resolve their disagreement, the parties may 

submit the issue to the Court for a determination, and 

may submit the document(s) at issue for in camera 

review. 

6. DOCUMENTS NOT REVIEWED FOR PRIVILEGE 

FOR BURDEN MINIMIZATION OR EFFICIENCY 

(“QUICK PEEK”) 

In the event that a producing party notifies a receiving party that it 

desires to produce Documents without having reviewed the Documents for 

privilege or work-product protection (“Quick Peek Production”), the parties 

will negotiate separate parameters for such productions and their related 

privilege protections. The provisions of Paragraph 3 of this Order will not 

apply to Quick Peek Productions. However, this Order shall apply to Quick 

Peek Productions to the extent that any privilege or protection is not waived in 

any other federal or state proceeding by disclosure in a Quick Peek Production. 

7. PROHIBITION ON USE OF PRIVILEGED 

INFORMATION 

To the extent any party is aware that it has obtained, or it is reasonably 

apparent that the party has obtained, privileged or work-product-protected 

information through production, disclosure, or communications, such 

information may not be submitted to the Court (except in connection with a 

challenge of the privilege assertion) or presented for admission into evidence or 

sought in discovery in this proceeding or in any other proceeding or action. 

 

Case 5:16-md-02752-LHK Document 75 Filed 03/27/17 Page 5 of 6
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 

IT IS SO STIPULATED, through Counsel of Record. 

DATED: March 27, 2017 MORGAN & MORGAN 

By: /s/ John Yanchunis 

John Yanchunis 

 Plaintiffs’ Lead Counsel 

DATED: March 27, 2017 HUNTON & WILLIAMS LLP 

By: /s/ Ann Marie Mortimer 

 Ann Marie Mortimer 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

 Yahoo! Inc. 

ATTESTATION 

 I hereby attest that each of the other signatories concurs in the filing of this 

document.

DATED: March 27, 2017 MORGAN & MORGAN 

By: /s/ John Yanchunis 

John Yanchunis 

 Plaintiffs’ Lead Counsel 

IT IS SO ORDERED that the foregoing Agreement is approved. 

DATED: ___________________ _______________________________ 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

 Nathaneal M. Cousins 

Case 5:16-md-02752-LHK Document 75 Filed 03/27/17 Page 6 of 6