PROTECTIVE ORDER RE INCIDENT INVESTIGATION MATERIALS AND PEACE OFFICER PERSONNEL RECORDS
SUZANNE H. SEGAL, Magistrate Judge.
Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Documents subject to this order are those which are responsive to plaintiffs' notice of deposition of the City of Oxnard's and Oxnard Police Department's persons most knowledgeable regarding the subject incident and request for production of documents served on October 10, 2013, to wit:
(a) Any and all documents relating to how the subject incident occurred, including all events relating thereto;
(b) Any and all video recordings of the subject incident;
(c) Any and all documents relating to any and all investigations the City of Oxnard conducted regarding the subject incident;
(d) Any and all witness statements acquired that relate to the subject incident;
(e) Any and all investigative reports relating to the subject incident;
(f) Any and all photographs taken of the scene of the subject incident; and
(g) Any and all photographs taken of Alfonso Limon, Jr., or Gerardo Limon relating to the subject incident.
2. The documents to be produced by defendants in response to plaintiffs' notice of deposition of the City of Oxnard's and Oxnard Police Department's persons most knowledgeable regarding the subject incident are more particularly identified and described as follows:
(a) Surveillance camera videos;
(b) Cell phone videos;
(c) Audiotapes of witness interviews;
(d) Audiotapes of officer recordings;
(e) Audiotapes of suspect interviews;
(f) Audiotapes of officer interviews;
(g) Audiotapes of radio traffic;
(h) Photographs of scene;
(i) Autopsy photos;
(j) Suspect photos;
(k) Suspect vehicle photos;
(l) Aerial photos;
(m) Officer photos;
(n) Officer weapon photos;
(o) Press releases;
(p) Critical incident log;
(q) Dispatch printouts;
(r) VCSO case summary;
(s) VCSO investigation reports and documents.
3. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER RE INCIDENT INVESTIGATION MATERIALS: Ventura County Deputy District Attorney Christopher Harman stated in his declaration dated November 1, 2013, that "Disclosure of confidential investigative materials will compromise the District Attorney's Office's ability to interview witnesses and fully and completely determine the facts and circumstances underlying the criminal investigation into the incident." In its order granting in part and denying in part defendants' motion to stay proceedings pending completion of the criminal investigation, this Court held:
The Court concludes that a limited stay and an appropriate protective order governing the disclosure of confidential information are sufficient to protect the DA's interest in its criminal investigation. A partial stay limits the impact of the instant litigation on the criminal investigation and a protective order mitigates the threat that produced information will become public and undermine investigatory efforts. Cf. Kelly v. City of San Jose, 114 F.R.D. 653, 666 (N.D. Cal. 1987) (law enforcement's interest in keeping internal policies and procedures private "drops dramatically . . . when a court imposes a tightly drawn protective order on the disclosure of such material, so that only counsel for plaintiff, and perhaps his expert, has access to it.")
December 10, 2013, court order, p. 15:1-13.
The Court finds that the reasons set forth above establish good cause for the granting of this protective order.
4. Further documents subject to this order are personnel records for Senior Officer John Brisslinger, Officer Ernie Orozco, Officer Don Ehrhardt, Officer Jess Aragon, Officer Rocky Marquez, Officer Pedro Rodriguez, Officer Ryan Lockner, Officer Zack Stiles, and Officer Matthew Ross.
5. The records to be produced by defendants are more particularly identified and described as follows:
(a) Training records;
(b) Employment records;
(c) Performance evaluation records.
6. Defendants may redact highly personal and irrelevant confidential information regarding the defendants contained in such personnel files and documents, such as, but not limited to, home addresses, phone numbers, names of family members, personal injury and workers' compensation information, salary information, tax return information, Social Security information and dates of birth.
7. Confidential peace officer personnel information or documents produced by defendants pursuant to the stipulation and this order shall be returned to the defendants at the conclusion of this action and any copies shall be destroyed forthwith at the conclusion of this action.
8. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER RE PEACE OFFICER PERSONNEL RECORDS: The Court finds that police officers have privacy interests in the documents and information contained in their personnel files. Those documents include information regarding home addresses, telephone numbers, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, phone numbers, family members, compensation and accounting records, performance reports, performance evaluations, promotions, commendations, and other documents and information. The Court finds that good cause exists to ensure that the disclosure of said documents in this litigation be covered by a confidentiality and protective order to preserve the officers' rights to privacy as to that information.
9. The defendants may produce the documents referenced in this protective order subject to the following protections:
(a) All such documents, writings, and information will be considered confidential information; this confidential information shall be used solely in connection with this case and the preparation and trial of this case or any related appellate proceeding, and not for any other purpose;
(b) Said documents and information shall not be disclosed by plaintiffs or their attorneys to anyone other than:
(1) Plaintiffs; (2) Plaintiffs' attorneys and their staff;
(3) Any expert or consultant hired or retained by plaintiffs or their attorneys;
(4) Any judge or magistrate judge presiding over any aspect of this action;
(5) Any mediator or other settlement officer agreed to or appointed to assess and evaluate the dispute.
10. Said documents, writings, and information covered by this order, including all videos, photographs, and audiotapes, shall not be provided to news media, television, or radio, or placed on the Internet.
11. All persons to whom said documents are disclosed will be apprised of this stipulation and of its binding nature on all persons connected with this case.
12. To the extent that any document covered by this stipulation is disclosed to a person or witness pursuant to this stipulation and order, the document shall be appropriately marked "Confidential Document produced in Limon v. City of Oxnard, et al., subject to protective order."
13. Nothing herein shall be construed as a concession as to the admissibility of such items herein disclosed, and the parties may reserve the right to seek exclusion of any such items or the information contained therein in limine or during trial.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
