# Frazier-Taylor

> District Court, E.D. California · October 15, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11211746

## Case

- **Full name:** Myesha Frazier-Taylor v. Roger M. Mansukhani; Anne-Leith Matlock; Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP
- **Court:** District Court, E.D. California
- **Decided:** October 15, 2025
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11211746

## Opinion text

BRADLEY & BROWN
1 Attorneys at Law
6780 N. West Ave.
2 Suite 102
Fresno, CA 93711
3
Peter Sean Bradley, Esq.
4 SBN #109258
Tel: (559) 960-5613
5 petersean@aol.com

6 Laura Elizabeth Brown, Esq.
SBN #306035
7 Tel: (559) 862-8633
laura@lauraebrown.com
8
Attorneys for Plaintiff
9 Myesha Frazier-Taylor

10 ROGER M. MANSUKHANI (SBN: 164463)
rmansukhani@grsm.com
11 ANNE-LEITH MATLOCK (SBN 244351)
amatlock@grsm.com
12 GORDON REES SCHULLY MANSUKHANI
LLP
13
101 W. Broadway, Suite 200
14 San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone:(619) 230-7701
15 Facsimile: (619) 696-7124
16 Attorneys for Defendants
CAMBRIDGE MANAGEMENT, INC.
17
18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
19 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
20
21 MYESHA FRAZIER-TAYLOR Case No. 1:25-CV-00448-BAM

22 Plaintiff, PROTECTIVE ORDER

23 vs. [Fresno County Superior Court – Case No.
18CECG01029]
24 CAMBRIDGE MANAGEMENT, INC.

25
Defendants. Action Filed: April 17, 2025
26 Trial Date: May 4, 2027

27 Initial Scheduling Conference (Supplemental)

28
1 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL:
2 WHEREAS, this case involves sensitive matters, including claims of employment
3 discrimination, harassment, and retaliation based on disability and whistleblowing activities;
4 WHEREAS, the parties recognize the importance of protecting private and confidential
5 information while ensuring fair and efficient discovery;
6 WHEREAS, the Court has the authority to issue protective orders to safeguard sensitive
7 information and balance the needs of all parties;
8
9 THEREFORE, THE PARTIES STIPULATE:
10 1. Scope of Protection
11 This Protective Order applies to all documents, materials, information, testimony, and
12 other discovery produced or disclosed in this case that contain or reveal:
13 a. Personnel records and files of current or former employees;
14
b. Confidential personal information, such as home addresses, phone numbers,
15 social security numbers, medical details, and financial data;
16 c. Trade secrets or proprietary business information;
17 d. Internal company policies, procedures, and communications related to personnel
18 matters;
19 e. Any other information designated as "CONFIDENTIAL" under this Order.

20 2. Designation of Confidential Information
21 Any party may mark materials as "CONFIDENTIAL" by clearly labeling them with the
22 designation "CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" before production or
23 disclosure. As to previously produced or disclosed documents the parties will have thirty (30)
24 days from date of executing this document to mark such items as “CONFIDENTIAL –
25 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER”.
26 If any party disagrees with a confidentiality designation, the designating party bears the
27 burden of justifying the designation. The parties must meet and confer on any disagreement, and
28 if no agreement is reached, the designating party must move for a protective order.
3. Use and Disclosure of Confidential Information
1
Materials designated as "CONFIDENTIAL" may only be:
2
1. Shared with attorneys of record and their staff directly involved in this case;
3
4 2. Shared with the parties to this case;
5 3. Shared with expert witnesses retained for this case, provided they sign a
confidentiality agreement;
6
4. Used solely for purposes of this litigation and not for any other purpose;
7
8 5. Disclosed during depositions, hearings, or trial, with appropriate measures to
maintain confidentiality.
9
4. Return or Destruction of Materials
10
Within 30 days after the conclusion of this case, all confidential materials and any copies
11
must be returned to the producing party or destroyed, with written confirmation of such return or
12
destruction. Nothing in this section precludes counsel from retaining a copy of their own file or
13
any client from retaining a copy of their own file.
14
5. Enforcement
15
Any violation of this Protective Order may result in appropriate sanctions, including
16
potential court proceedings.
17
18 6. Modifications
This Order may be modified by agreement of the parties or further order of the Court.
19
7. Good Faith Cooperation
20
All parties will work cooperatively to ensure the protection of sensitive information while
21
facilitating the fair resolution of this case.
22
//
23
//
24
// [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
25
//
26
//
27
//
28
1 IS SO STIPULATED:
2
3 Dated: 10/14/25 BRADLEY & BROWN
4 /s/ Peter Sean Bradley
5 “PeterSean Bradley
Counsel for Plaintiff

7 Dated: _ 10/14/25 GORDON REES, A.P.C.
8
9 Anne~Leith W. Matlock,
Anne-Leith Matlock
10 Attorneys for Defendant
11 Oe Ok
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

PROTECTIVE ORDER

1 ORDER
2 The Court has reviewed the stipulated Protective Order filed by Plaintiff Myesha
3 Frazier-Taylor (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Cambridge Management, Inc. (“Defendant”),
4 through their counsel of record, requesting that the Court enter an Order.
5
Having considered the above stipulation, and finding good cause, the Court adopts the
6
signed stipulated Protective Order, (Doc. 18), subject to the following:
7
Page 3, line 19: “This Order may be modified by agreement of the parties or further order
8
of the Court” is hereby struck and replaced with “This Order may be modified by agreement of
9
the parties or further order of the Court, up to and until the termination of this action.” In
10
addition, CONFIDENTIAL information may be shared with the Court.
11
The parties are advised that pursuant to the Local Rules of the United States District
12
Court, Eastern District of California, any documents subject to the protective order to be filed
13
under seal must be accompanied by a written request which complies with Local Rule 141 prior
14
to sealing. The party making a request to file documents under seal shall be required to show
15
16 good cause for documents attached to a non-dispositive motion or compelling reasons for
17 documents attached to a dispositive motion. Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665,
18 677-78 (9th Cir. 2009). Within five (5) days of any approved document filed under seal, the
19 party shall file a redacted copy of the sealed document. The redactions shall be narrowly tailored
20 to protect only the information that is confidential or was deemed confidential.
21 Additionally, the parties shall consider resolving any dispute arising under the protective
22 order according to the Court’s informal discovery dispute procedure.
23
24

25 IT IS SO ORDERED.

26 Dated: October 15, 2025 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _
27 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
28

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11211746. Public record. Not legal advice.