ROSANNA MALOUF PETERSON, District Judge.
BEFORE THE COURT is Defendant Equifax's Motion for a Protective Order, ECF No. 221. The Court has reviewed the motion, the record, and is fully informed.
Equifax seeks a Protective Order in order to provide discovery while protecting confidential and proprietary information. Plaintiffs object to the motion and argue that it should be "dismissed as moot" because they allege that they sent a version of the proposed protective order to Equifax with their changes. ECF No. 229. The Court has reviewed Plaintiffs' proposed protective order and finds that Plaintiffs misrepresent the nature of their changes. Plaintiffs stated that "Plaintiffs deleted the first paragraph and made minor changes to the last paragraph. The rest of the protective order was not changed by the Plaintiffs." Id. at 1. A comparison of the two proposed protective orders demonstrates more significant changes that the Court rejects.
Therefore, the Court finds good cause to grant Equifax's request. The Court will enter a Protective Order as a separate docket entry.
Accordingly,
Defendant Equifax's Motion for a Protective Order,
The District Court Clerk is directed to enter this Order and provide copies to counsel and to pro se Plaintiffs.
The undersigned hereby acknowledges that he/she has read the Protective Order in the above-captioned action, understands the terms thereof, and agrees to be bound by its terms. The undersigned submits to the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington in matters relating to the Protective Order and understands that the terms of the Protective Order obligate him/her to use materials designated as CONFIDENTIAL in accordance with the Order solely for the purposes of the above-captioned action, and not to disclose any such materials designated as CONFIDENTIAL to any other person, firm, or concern.
The undersigned acknowledges that violation of the Protective Order may result in penalties for contempt of court.