Amons v. City of Pittsburg, 4:19-cv-00301-KAW. (2020)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20200220a35
Visitors: 17
Filed: Feb. 19, 2020
Latest Update: Feb. 19, 2020
Summary: ORDER REGARDING PROPOSED STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Re: Dkt. No. 37 KANDIS A. WESTMORE , Magistrate Judge . On February 18, 2020, the parties filed a stipulated protective order. They did not, however, indicate whether they were using a model protective order or a modified protective order as required by the Court's Standing Order. ( See Judge Westmore's General Standing Order 12.) Accordingly, the parties are ordered to submit, within 7 days of this order, (a) a declaration stating t
Summary: ORDER REGARDING PROPOSED STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Re: Dkt. No. 37 KANDIS A. WESTMORE , Magistrate Judge . On February 18, 2020, the parties filed a stipulated protective order. They did not, however, indicate whether they were using a model protective order or a modified protective order as required by the Court's Standing Order. ( See Judge Westmore's General Standing Order 12.) Accordingly, the parties are ordered to submit, within 7 days of this order, (a) a declaration stating th..
More
ORDER REGARDING PROPOSED STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER
Re: Dkt. No. 37
KANDIS A. WESTMORE, Magistrate Judge.
On February 18, 2020, the parties filed a stipulated protective order. They did not, however, indicate whether they were using a model protective order or a modified protective order as required by the Court's Standing Order. (See Judge Westmore's General Standing Order ¶ 12.)
Accordingly, the parties are ordered to submit, within 7 days of this order, (a) a declaration stating that the proposed order is identical to one of the model orders, (b) a declaration explaining each modification to the model order, along with a redline version comparing the proposed protective order with the model order, or (c) a declaration explaining why use of one of the model orders is not practicable.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
