CHARLES F. EICK, Magistrate Judge.
The parties in this action, by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby agree and stipulate as follows with regard to discovery in this action, which the parties acknowledge involve the confidential and/or proprietary information of defendant, BOMBARDIER RECREATIONAL PRODUCTS, INC. ("Bombardier"). Good cause exists to enter a Protective Order. Bombardier is a company who specializes in the manufacturing of personal watercrafts and other types of sporting recreational vehicles. Because of the nature of Bombardier's business, certain documents which may be sought to be produced in this litigation are confidential and/or proprietary in that they constitute trade secrets, confidential corporate or other confidential research development, or commercial information requiring a specific need for a protective order before they are produced.
Based upon stipulation by the Plaintiff, Dana Conrad, and the Defendant, Bombardier Recreational Products Inc., and their respective counsels, and it having appeared to this Court that the parties have a mutual interest in the orderly and prompt production of documents and materials, the Court enters this Agreed Protective Order of Confidentiality. Each side has discussed with the other their respective concerns about the propriety of designating certain information, such as pricing, competitor information, and general trade secret information which the Parties agree is confidential. The Parties, having weighed the issues related to having a court decide the propriety of a confidentiality designation, have reached a compromise. The compromise, as set forth below, provides for the protection of such confidential information, a method available to challenge any designation of confidentiality, and the exclusion of production of counsel's core work product.
1. Information obtained from Defendant in response to discovery requests or from a witness that does not constitute trade secret, confidential corporate or other confidential research development, or commercial information is not the subject of this Order and production of such material will not be delayed while the Parties discuss any appropriate method of handling Defendant's production of confidential materials.
2. No party to this action shall seek or request an Order to obtain counsel's core work product, unless said party has a good faith basis to believe that the information in dispute does not constitute core work product; and
3. For information obtained from Defendant in response to discovery requests or from a witness that Defendant regards as confidential trade secrets or other confidential research, development, or commercial information, such confidential information shall be the subject of this Order and it is further agreed that:
4. The following has been agreed to as to all confidential information that is the subject of this Order:
5. Should a requesting party dispute that materials produced constitute trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information, said requesting party shall notify the producing party within thirty (30) days following receipt of said documents. The producing party may, within thirty (30) days, file a motion with the court for a determination that the materials are entitled to confidentiality. Under such circumstances, the producing party bears the burden of proving the propriety of designating an item as confidential. If a motion is brought, the materials shall be handled in accordance with this Order and the disputed documents will remain protected pending the Court's review and decision until the motion is ruled upon, and thereafter shall be subject to this Order if the court determines that the material is confidential research, development, or commercial information.
6. Confidential materials may be disclosed to attorneys or other office personnel, experts, contractors, and consultants, working with counsel for the requesting party in this case. In the event that anyone outside the confines of the office of counsel is to receive information covered by this Stipulation, they must sign an Acknowledgment of Protective Order, which must be sent to the individual with a letter explaining the confidentiality terms of the Agreed Protective Order and that they will be bound by those terms.
7. Counsel for the requesting party shall assure that anyone working in his/her office or as his agent will be familiarized with the terms of this Order and be instructed that they are bound by the Order.
8. Plaintiff, Plaintiff's counsel, technical consultants, and/or experts shall not advertise nor otherwise publish that they have the information obtained through the Defendant through discovery in this case, whether described specifically or generally.
9. The requesting party shall maintain a list of the names of all persons outside its firm to whom the information is disclosed until such time as all materials covered by this Agreed Protective Order are returned to counsel for Defendant as set forth in paragraph 10 of this Agreed Protective Order.
10. At the completion of the litigation, the confidential information produced pursuant to this Agreed Protective Order, including all copies, the list maintained in paragraph 9, a copy of all Acknowledgment of Protective Order certifications, and a copy of all letters that accompanied all Acknowledgement of Protective Order certifications shall be returned to Scott M. Sarason, Esquire, counsel for Defendant. The Clerk may either return to Mr. Sarason or destroy any confidential information sealed under this Order.
11. This Agreed Protective Order shall be entered of record with the Court and be of the same force and effect as an order of the Court.
I, __________________, being first duly sworn, state that I reside at ______________________, County of _________________, State of, and that I have received a copy of the Agreed Protective Order of Confidentiality ("Protective Order") entered in Dana Conrad v. Bombardier Recreational Products Inc., Case No. 2:14-CV-04383-SJO-E, United States District Court for the Central District of California — Western Division, and a copy of a letter explaining that Protective Order. I have read both of these documents and understand that I am subject to and bound by the terms of that Protective Order. I further understand that even though I am not a party to Kaylee Hunter v. Bombardier Recreational Products Inc., et al., Case 10-2639 JNE/FLN, the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota has jurisdiction and authority to enforce that Protective Order as it applies to me and my actions.
DATED this ________ day of _________________, 2014. SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED TO before me this _______ day of __________________, 2014.