Opinion

Oscar Corona v. City of Fontana

Court: District Court, C.D. California
Filed: Jun 7, 2022
Cited by: 0 cases
Authority: More cited than 16.3%

distinguishing “good cause” showing for sealing documents produced in discovery from “compelling reasons” standard when merits-related documents are part of court record

How later courts described this case

distinguishing “good cause” showing for sealing documents produced in discovery from “compelling reasons” standard when merits-related documents are part of court record
“Questions of privilege that arise in the course of 23] the adjudication of federal rights are ‘governed by the principles of the common law 24] as they may be interpreted by the courts of the United States in the light of reason 25 and experience.’” (quoting Fed. R. Evid. 501)
peace officers have constitutionally-based “privacy rights [that] are not inconsequential” in their police personnel records

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 1 of 19 Page ID #:164

ATKINSON, ANDELSON, LOYA, RUUD & ROMO

A Professional Law Corporation

Angela M. Powell State Bar No. 191876

Angela.Powell@aalrr.com

Eric Gamboa State Bar No. 311924

Eric.Gamboa@aalrr.com

12800 Center Court Drive South, Suite 300

Cerritos, California 90703-9364

Telephone: (562) 653-3200

Fax: (562) 653-3333

Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF FONTANA; CHIEF

WILLIAM GREEN; OFFICER JACOB GREGG; and

LIEUTENANT MATT KRAUT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RIVERSIDE

OSCAR CORONA, Case No. 5:22-cv-00034-JGB (SPx)

Plaintiff, STIPULATED PROTECTIVE

ORDER

Judge: Hon. Jesus G. Bernal

CITY OF FONTANA; CHIEF Ctrm: 1

WILLIAM GREEN; OFFICER J.

GREGG; LIEUTENANT KRAUT; and Complaint Filed: January 7, 2022

DOES 1-10, Trial Date: None

Defendant.

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

By and through their counsel of record in this action, Plaintiff OSCAR

CORONA (“Plaintiff”), and Defendant CITY OF FONTANA (“City”), and

Defendants CHIEF WILLIAM GREEN, OFFICER JACOB GREGG and

LIEUTENANT MATT KRAUT (collectively hereinafter “Defendants”) – the

parties – hereby stipulate for the purpose of jointly requesting that the Honorable

Court enter a Stipulated Protective Order re confidential documents in this matter as

follows:

/ / /

005759.00009

37174923.1

Case 4:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page2of19 Page ID #:165

I} 1. A. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS

2 Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential,

3| proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public

4] disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may

5|| be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to

6| enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this

7 Stipulated Protective Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or

8|| responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and

O 9} use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential

6 10] treatment under the applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledge, as

11] set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle

= z □□ 12] them to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the

< 5555 13] procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party

Seis’ 14] seeks permission from the court to file material under seal.

5 85.538 15 B. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT

ef gs * 16 1.1. Contentions re Harm from Disclosure of Confidential Materials.

< 17 Defendants contend that there is good cause and a particularized need for a

6 18] Protective Order to preserve the interests of confidentiality and privacy in peace

19] officer personnel file records and associated investigative or confidential records for

* 20] the following reasons.

21 First, Defendants contend that peace officers have a federal privilege of

22| privacy in their personnel file records: a reasonable expectation of privacy therein

23] that is underscored, specified, and arguably heightened by the Pitchess protective

24] procedure of California law. See Sanchez v. Santa Ana Police Dept., 936 F.2d 1027,

25} 1033-1034 (9th Cir. 1990); Hallon v. City of Stockton, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

26] 14665, *2-3, 12-13 (E.D. Cal. 2012) (concluding that “while “[f]ederal law applies

27| to privilege based discovery disputes involving federal claims,” the “state privilege

28] law which is consistent with its federal equivalent significantly assists in applying

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

- 3 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 3 of 19 Page ID #:166

[federal] privilege law to discovery disputes”); Soto v. City of Concord, 162 F.R.D.

603, 613 n. 4, 616 (N.D. Cal. 1995) (peace officers have constitutionally-based

“privacy rights [that] are not inconsequential” in their police personnel records); cf.

Cal. Penal Code §§ 832.7, 832.8; Cal. Evid. Code §§ 1040-1047. Defendants

further contend that uncontrolled disclosure of such personnel file information can

threaten the safety of non-party witnesses, officers, and their families/associates.

Second, Defendants contend that municipalities and law enforcement

agencies have federal deliberative-executive process privilege, federal official

information privilege, federal law enforcement privilege, and federal attorney-client

privilege (and/or attorney work product protection) interests in the personnel files of

their peace officers – particularly as to those portions of peace officer personnel files

that contain critical self-analysis, internal deliberation/decision-making or

evaluation/analysis, or communications for the purposes of obtaining or rendering

legal advice or analysis – potentially including but not limited to

evaluative/analytical portions of Internal Affairs type records or reports,

evaluative/analytical portions of supervisory records or reports, and/or reports

prepared at the direction of counsel, or for the purpose of obtaining or rendering

legal advice. See Sanchez, 936 F.2d at 1033-1034; Maricopa Audubon Soc’y v.

United States Forest Serv., 108 F.3d 1089, 1092-1095 (9th Cir. 1997); Soto, 162

F.R.D. at 613, 613 n. 4; Kelly v. City of San Jose, 114 F.R.D. 654, 668-671 (N.D.

Cal. 1987); Tuite v. Henry, 181 F.R.D. 175, 176-177 (D. D.C. 1998); Hamstreet v.

Duncan, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89702 (D. Or. 2007); Admiral Ins. Co. v. United

States Dist. Ct., 881 F.2d 1486, 1492, 1495 (9th Cir. 1988). Defendants further

contend that such personnel file records are restricted from disclosure by the public

entity’s custodian of records pursuant to applicable California law and that

uncontrolled release is likely to result in needless intrusion of officer privacy;

impairment in the collection of third-party witness information and statements and

related legitimate law enforcement investigations/interests; and a chilling of open

005759.00009

37174923.1

Case 4:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page4of19 Page ID #:167

1] and honest discussion regarding and/or investigation into alleged misconduct that

2] can erode a public entity’s ability to identify and/or implement any remedial

measures that may be required.

4 Third, Defendants contend that, since peace officers do not have the same

5|| rights as other private citizens to avoid giving compelled statements, it is contrary to

6| the fundamental principles of fairness to permit uncontrolled release of officers’

7 compelled statements. See generally Lybarger v. City of Los Angeles, 40 Cal.3d

8|| 822, 828-830 (1985); cf. U.S. Const., amend V.

O 9 Accordingly, Defendants contend that, without a Protective Order preventing

6 10} such, production of confidential records in the case can and will likely substantially

11} impair and harm Defendant public entity’s interests in candid self-critical analysis,

= 12] frank internal deliberations, obtaining candid information from witnesses,

< 5. Eg 13] preserving the safety of witnesses, preserving the safety of peace officers and peace

Peeese 141 officers’ families and associates, protecting the privacy officers of peace officers,

5 85553" 15] and preventing pending investigations from being detrimentally undermined by

ef gs * 16 publication of private, sensitive, or confidential information — as can and often does

< 17} result in litigation.

6 18 1.2 Plaintiff does not agree with and does not stipulate to Defendants’

19} contentions herein above. Among other things, Defendants’ reliance on Pitchess

* 20] and other state law privileges are inapplicable in this federal question case, in which

21] federal law governs any claim of privilege. Fed. R. Evid. 501; United States v.

22|| Zolin, 491 U.S. 554, 562 (1989) (“Questions of privilege that arise in the course of

23] the adjudication of federal rights are ‘governed by the principles of the common law

24] as they may be interpreted by the courts of the United States in the light of reason

25 and experience.’” (quoting Fed. R. Evid. 501)); see also Kelly v. San Jose, 114

26] F.R.D. 653, 655 (N.D. Cal. 1987) (“[I]n a civil rights case brought under federal

27| statutes questions of privilege are resolved by federal law. State privilege doctrine,

28] whether derived from statutes or court decisions, is not binding on federal courts in

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Case 4:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page5of19 Page ID #:168

1] these kinds of cases.” (citing Kerr v. U.S. District Court for the N. Dist. of Cal.,

2] 5111 F.2d 192, 197 (9th Cir. 1975), and Breed v. United States Dist. Ct., 542 F.2d

3] 1114, 1115 (9th Cir. 1976)). Nothing in this Stipulation or its associated Protective

4] Order indicates any agreement by Plaintiff with the legal arguments and claimed

5|| privileges set forth in § 1.1 above.

6 However, Plaintiff agrees that there is Good Cause for a Protective Order so

7} as to preserve the respective interests of the parties without the need to further

8| burden the Court with such issues. Specifically, the parties jointly contend that,

O 9] absent this Stipulation and its associated Protective Order, the parties’ respective

6 10] privilege interests may be impaired or harmed, and that this Stipulation and its

11} associated Protective Order may avoid such harm by permitting the parties to

= z 12] facilitate discovery with reduced risk that privileged and/or sensitive/confidential

< 553: 13] information will become matters of public record.

rig: 14 1.3. The parties jointly contend that there is typically a particularized need

6 15] for protection as to any medical records because of the privacy interests at stake

uP 16] therein. Because of these sensitive interests, a Court Order should address these

< 2 17} documents rather than a private agreement between the parties.

6 18 1.4 The parties therefore stipulate that there is Good Cause for, and hereby

19} jointly request that the honorable Court issue/enter, a Protective Order re

* 20] confidential documents consistent with the terms and provisions of this

21] Stipulation. However, the entry of a Protective Order by the Court pursuant to this

22] Stipulation shall not be construed as any ruling by the Court on the aforementioned

23] legal statements or privilege claims in this section (§ 1), nor shall this section be

24] construed as part of any such Court Order.

25 1.5 It is the intent of the parties that information will not be designated as

26] confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good

27| faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and

28] there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of this case.

sa 5.

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

- 6 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 6 of 19 Page ID #:169

2. DEFINITIONS

2.1 Action: Oscar Corona v. City of Fontana, et al., Case No. 5:22-cv-

00034-JGB (SPx)

2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation

of information or items under this Order.

2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of

how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for

protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), and as specified above in

the Good Cause Statement.

2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as

their support staff).

2.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or

items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as

“CONFIDENTIAL.”

2.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless

of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including,

among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or

generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter.

2.7 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter

pertinent to the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as

an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action.

2.8 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this Action.

House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside

counsel.

2.9 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or

other legal entity not named as a Party to this action.

2.10 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a party

to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a party to this Action and have

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 7 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 7 of 19 Page ID #:170

appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which

has appeared on behalf of that party, and includes support staff.

2.11 Party: any party to this Action, including all of its officers, directors,

employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their

support staffs).

2.12 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or

Discovery Material in this Action.

2.13 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support

services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or

demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium)

and their employees and subcontractors.

2.14 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is

designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.”

2.15 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material

from a Producing Party.

3. SCOPE

The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Protective Order cover not

only Protected Material (as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or

extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, excerpts, summaries, or

compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or

presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material.

Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by the orders of the

trial judge. This Protective Order does not govern the use of Protected Material at

trial.

4. DURATION

Once a case proceeds to trial, all of the information that was designated as

confidential or maintained pursuant to this Protective Order becomes public and will

be presumptively available to all members of the public, including the press, unless

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 8 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 8 of 19 Page ID #:171

compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings to proceed otherwise are

made to the trial judge in advance of the trial. See Kamakana v. City and County of

Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180-81 (9th Cir. 2006) (distinguishing “good cause”

showing for sealing documents produced in discovery from “compelling reasons”

standard when merits-related documents are part of court record). Accordingly, the

terms of this Protective Order do not extend to the CONFIDENTIAL information

and materials introduced or admitted as an exhibit at trial. Even after final

disposition of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations imposed by this

Protective Order shall remain in effect for any CONFIDENTIAL information and

materials that were not introduced or admitted at trial until a Designating 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 Action,

with or without prejudice; and (2) final judgment herein after the completion and

exhaustion of all appeals, rehearings, remands, trials, or reviews of this Action,

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

pursuant to applicable law.

5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL

5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection.

Each Party or Non-Party that designates information or items for protection under

this Protective Order must take care to limit any such designation to specific

material that qualifies under the appropriate standards. The Designating Party must

designate for protection only those parts of material, documents, items, or oral or

written communications that qualify so that other portions of the material,

documents, items, or communications for which protection is not warranted are not

swept unjustifiably within the ambit of this Protective Order.

Mass, indiscriminate, or routinized designations are prohibited. Designations

that are shown to be clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper

purpose (e.g., to unnecessarily encumber the case development process or to impose

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 9 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 9 of 19 Page ID #:172

unnecessary expenses and burdens on other parties) may expose the Designating

Party to sanctions.

If it comes to a Designating Party’s attention that information or items that it

designated for protection do not qualify for protection, that Designating Party must

promptly notify all other Parties that it is withdrawing the inapplicable designation.

5.2 Manner and Timing of Designations. Except as otherwise provided in

this Protective Order (see, e.g., second paragraph of section 5.2(a) below), or as

otherwise stipulated or ordered, Disclosure or Discovery Material that qualifies for

protection under this Protective Order must be clearly so designated before the

material is disclosed or produced.

Designation in conformity with this Protective Order requires:

(a) for information in documentary form (e.g., paper or electronic

documents, but excluding transcripts of depositions or other pretrial or trial

proceedings), that the Producing Party affix at a minimum, the legend

“CONFIDENTIAL” (hereinafter “CONFIDENTIAL legend”), to each page that

contains protected material. If only a portion or portions of the material on a page

qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected

portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). The

CONFIDENTIAL legend should not cover or obscure any text or images.

A Party or Non-Party that makes original documents available for

inspection need not designate them for protection until after the inspecting Party has

indicated which documents it would like copied and produced. During the

inspection and before the designation, all of the material made available for

inspection shall be deemed “CONFIDENTIAL.” After the inspecting Party has

identified the documents it wants copied and produced, the Producing Party must

determine which documents, or portions thereof, qualify for protection under this

Protective Order. Then, before producing the specified documents, the Producing

Party must affix the “CONFIDENTIAL legend” to each page that contains Protected

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 10 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 10 of 19 Page ID #:173

Material. If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for

protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s)

(e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

(b) for testimony given in depositions that the Designating Party

identify the Disclosure or Discovery Material on the record, before the close of the

deposition all protected testimony.

and for any other tangible items, that the Producing Party affix in a prominent place

on the exterior of the container or containers in which the information is stored the

legend “CONFIDENTIAL.” If only a portion or portions of the information

warrants protection, the Producing Party, to the extent practicable, shall identify the

protected portion(s).

5.3 Inadvertent Failures to Designate. If timely corrected, an inadvertent

failure to designate qualified information or items does not, standing alone, waive

the Designating Party’s right to secure protection under this Protective Order for

such material. Upon timely correction of a designation, the Receiving Party must

make reasonable efforts to assure that the material is treated in accordance with the

provisions of this Order.

6. CHALLENGING CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS

6.1 Timing of Challenges. Any Party or Non-Party may challenge a

designation of confidentiality at any time that is consistent with the Court’s

Scheduling Order.

6.2 Meet and Confer. The Challenging Party shall initiate the dispute

resolution process under Local Rule 37.1 et seq.

6.3 The burden of persuasion in any such challenge proceeding shall be on

the Designating Party. Frivolous challenges, and those made for an improper

purpose (e.g., to harass or impose unnecessary expenses and burdens on other

parties) may expose the Challenging Party to sanctions. Unless the Designating

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 11 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 11 of 19 Page ID #:174

Party has waived or withdrawn the confidentiality designation, 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 the

challenge.

7. ACCESS TO AND USE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL

7.1 Basic Principles. A Receiving Party may use Protected Material that is

disclosed or produced by another Party or by a Non-Party in connection with this

Action only for prosecuting, defending, or attempting to settle this Action. Such

Protected Material may be disclosed only to the categories of persons and under the

conditions described in this Protective Order. When the Action has been terminated,

a Receiving Party must comply with the provisions of section 13 below (FINAL

DISPOSITION).

Protected Material must be stored and maintained by a Receiving Party at a

location and in a secure manner that ensures that access is limited to the persons

authorized under this Protective Order.

7.2 Disclosure of “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items. Unless

otherwise ordered by the Court or permitted in writing by the Designating Party, a

Receiving Party may disclose any information or item designated

“CONFIDENTIAL” only to:

(a) The Receiving Party;

(b) the Receiving Party’s Outside Counsel of Record in this Action,

as well as employees of said Outside Counsel of Record to whom it is reasonably

necessary to disclose the information for this Action;

of the Receiving Party to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this Action;

(d) Experts (as defined in this Protective Order) of the Receiving

Party to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this Action and who have

signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A);

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 12 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 12 of 19 Page ID #:175

(e) the Court and its personnel;

(f) court reporters and their staff;

(g) professional jury or trial consultants, mock jurors, and

Professional Vendors to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this Action

and who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit

A);

(h) the author or recipient of a document containing the information

or a custodian or other person who otherwise possessed or knew the information;

(i) during their depositions, witnesses, and attorneys for witnesses,

in the Action to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary provided: (1) the deposing

party requests that the witness sign the form attached as Exhibit 1 hereto; and (2)

they will not be permitted to keep any confidential information unless they sign the

“Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A), unless otherwise

agreed by the Designating Party or ordered by the Court. Pages of transcribed

deposition testimony or exhibits to depositions that reveal Protected Material may

be separately bound by the court reporter and may not be disclosed to anyone except

as permitted under this Protective Order; and

(j) any mediator or settlement officer, and their supporting

personnel, mutually agreed upon by any of the parties engaged in settlement

discussions.

8. PROTECTED MATERIAL SUBPOENAED OR ORDERED

PRODUCED IN OTHER LITIGATION

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 Action as

“CONFIDENTIAL,” that Party must:

(a) promptly notify in writing the Designating 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

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 13 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 13 of 19 Page ID #:176

to issue in the other litigation 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 Stipulated Protective Order; and

pursued by the Designating Party whose Protected Material may be affected.

If the Designating Party timely seeks a protective order, the Party served with

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

action as “CONFIDENTIAL” before a determination by the court from which the

subpoena or order issued, unless the Party has obtained the Designating Party’s

permission. The Designating Party shall bear the burden and expense of seeking

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

should be construed as authorizing or encouraging a Receiving Party in this Action

to disobey a lawful directive from another court.

9. A NON-PARTY’S PROTECTED MATERIAL SOUGHT TO BE

PRODUCED IN THIS LITIGATION

(a) the terms of this Protective Order are applicable to information

produced by a Non-Party in this Action and designated as “CONFIDENTIAL.”

Such information produced by Non-Parties in connection with this litigation is

protected by the remedies and relief provided by this Protective Order. Nothing in

these provisions should be construed as prohibiting a Non-Party from seeking

additional protections.

(b) In the event that a Party is required, by a valid discovery request, to

produce a Non-Party’s confidential information in its possession, and the Party is

subject to an agreement with the Non-Party not to produce the Non-Party’s

confidential information, then the Party shall:

(1) promptly notify in writing the Requesting Party and the Non-

Party that some or all of the information requested is subject to a confidentiality

agreement with a Non-Party;

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 14 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 14 of 19 Page ID #:177

(2) promptly provide the Non-Party with a copy of the Stipulated

Protective Order in this Action, the relevant discovery request(s), and a reasonably

specific description of the information requested; and

(3) make the information requested available for inspection by the

Non-Party, if requested.

14 days of receiving the notice and accompanying information, the Receiving Party

may produce the Non-Party’s confidential information responsive to the discovery

request. If the Non-Party timely seeks a protective order, the Receiving Party shall

not produce any information in its possession or control that is subject to the

confidentiality agreement with the Non-Party before a determination by the Court.

Absent a court order to the contrary, the Non-Party shall bear the burden and

expense of seeking protection in this Court of its Protected Material.

10. UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL

If a Receiving Party learns that, by inadvertence or otherwise, it has disclosed

Protected Material to any person or in any circumstance not authorized under this

Protective Order, the Receiving Party must immediately (a) notify in writing the

Designating Party of the unauthorized disclosures, (b) use its best efforts to retrieve

all unauthorized copies of the Protected Material, (c) inform the person or persons to

whom unauthorized disclosures were made of all the terms of this Protective Order,

and (d) request such person or persons to execute the “Acknowledgment and

Agreement to Be Bound” that is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

11. INADVERTENT PRODUCTION OF PRIVILEGED OR OTHERWISE

PROTECTED MATERIAL

When a Producing Party gives notice to Receiving Parties that certain

inadvertently produced material is subject to a claim of privilege or other protection,

the obligations of the Receiving Parties are those set forth in Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 26(b)(5)(B). This provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 15 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 15 of 19 Page ID #:178

may be established in an e-discovery order that provides for production without

prior privilege review. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) and (e), insofar

as the parties reach an agreement on the effect of disclosure of a communication or

information covered by the attorney-client privilege or work product protection, the

parties may incorporate their agreement in the stipulated protective order submitted

to the Court.

12. MISCELLANEOUS

12.1 Right to Further Relief. Nothing in this Protective Order abridges the

right of any person to seek its modification by the Court in the future.

12.2 Right to Assert Other Objections. By stipulating to the entry of this

Protective Order no Party waives any right it otherwise would have to object to

disclosing or producing any information or item on any ground not addressed in this

Stipulated Protective Order. Similarly, no Party waives any right to object on any

ground to use in evidence of any of the material covered by this Protective Order.

12.3 Filing Protected Material. A Party that seeks to file under seal any

Protected Material must comply with Civil Local Rule 79-5. Protected Material may

only be filed under seal pursuant to a court order authorizing the sealing of the

specific Protected Material at issue. If a Party’s request to file Protected Material

under seal is denied by the Court, then the Receiving Party may file the information

in the public record unless otherwise instructed by the Court.

13. FINAL DISPOSITION

After the final disposition of this Action, as defined in paragraph 4, within 60

days of a written request by the Designating Party, each Receiving Party must return

all Protected Material to the Producing Party or destroy such material. As used in

this subdivision, “all Protected Material” includes all copies, abstracts, compilations,

summaries, and any other format reproducing or capturing any of the Protected

Material. Whether the Protected Material is returned or destroyed, the Receiving

Party must submit a written certification to the Producing Party (and, if not the same

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 16 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 16 of 19 Page ID #:179

person or entity, to the Designating Party) by the 60-day deadline that (1) identifies

(by category, where appropriate) all the Protected Material that was returned or

destroyed and (2) affirms that the Receiving Party has not retained any copies,

abstracts, compilations, summaries or any other format reproducing or capturing any

of the Protected Material. 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 Protected Material. Any such archival copies that contain or

constitute Protected Material remain subject to this Protective Order as set forth in

Section 4 (DURATION).

14. VIOLATION

Any violation of this Protective Order may be punished by any and all

appropriate measures including, without limitation, contempt proceedings and/or

monetary sanctions.

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

Dated: May 26, 2022 HADSELL STORMER RENICK & DAI LLP

/s/ Cathi Choi

By:

Dan Stormer

Brian Olney

Cathi Choi

Attorneys for Plaintiff OSCAR

CORONA

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 17 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 17 of 19 Page ID #:180

Dated: May 26, 2022 ATKINSON, ANDELSON, LOYA, RUUD &

ROMO

/s/ Angela M. Powell

By:

Angela M. Powell

Eric Gamboa

Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF

FONTANA; CHIEF WILLIAM

GREEN; OFFICER JACOB GREGG;

and LIEUTENANT MATT KRAUT

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 18 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 18 of 19 Page ID #:181

FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 7, 2022 By:

Honorable Sheri Pym

Magistrate Judge

United States District Court

005759.00009

37174923.1

- 19 -

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

OMOR & DUUR ,AYOL ,NOSLEDNA ,NOSNIKTA

NOITAROPROC LANOISSEFORP A

WAL TA SYENROTTA

003 ETIUS ,HTUOS EVIRD TRUOC RETNEC 00821

4639-30709 AINROFILAC ,SOTIRREC

0023-356 )265( :ENOHPELET

3333-356 )265( :XAF

Case 5:22-cv-00034-JGB-SP Document 26 Filed 06/07/22 Page 19 of 19 Page ID #:182

EXHIBIT A

ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND AGREEMENT TO BE BOUND

I, _____________________________ [print or type full name], of

_________________ [print or type full address], declare under penalty of perjury

that I have read in its entirety and understand the Stipulated Protective Order that

was issued by the United States District Court for the Central District of California

on [date] in the case of Oscar Corona v. City of Fontana, et al., Case No. 5:22-cv-

00034-JGB (SPx). I agree to comply with and to be bound by all the terms of this

Stipulated Protective Order and I understand and acknowledge that failure to so

comply could expose me to sanctions and punishment in the nature of contempt. I

solemnly promise that I will not disclose in any manner any information or item that

is subject to this Stipulated Protective Order to any person or entity except in strict

compliance with the provisions of this Order.

I further agree to submit to the jurisdiction of the United States District Court

for the Central District of California for the purpose of enforcing the terms of this

Stipulated Protective Order, even if such enforcement proceedings occur after

termination of this action. I hereby appoint __________________________ [print or

type full name] of _______________________________________ [print or type

full address and telephone number] as my California agent for service of process in

connection with this action or any proceedings related to enforcement of this

Stipulated Protective Order.

Dated:

City and State where sworn and signed:

Printed Name:

Signature:

005759.00009

37174923.1

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.