ORDER

MONTE C. RICHARDSON, Magistrate Judge.

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant, Lender Processing Services's Motion to Quash Third Party Subpoena (Doc. 37) and Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 39). In the first motion, Defendant asks the Court to quash a subpoena issued to the attorney of a plaintiff with a similar case, Cornett v. Lender Processing Services, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-233-J-32TEM. (Doc. 37). The subpoena seeks many of the same documents Plaintiff has requested in the instant case, however, in the Cornett case, the parties entered into a confidentiality order. Id. Here, Defendant alleges Plaintiff has refused to enter into a similar confidentiality order and is simply using the subpoena in an attempt to obtain confidential records without having to enter into a confidentiality order. Id. In the Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 39), Defendant asks the Court to enter a proposed protective order (identical to the one entered in the Cornett case) requiring the confidential treatment of "trade secrets and other confidential research, development, and commercial information that will produced through the discovery process in this case." (Doc. 39, p.1). Plaintiff filed responses in opposition to these Motions on October 12, 2012 (Docs. 41 and 44). Accordingly, the matters are now ripe for judicial review.

I. BACKGROUND

This litigation involves Plaintiff's claim that after working for Defendant for over twenty-three years and rising to the position of Chief Operating Officer for the Default Solutions division, Plaintiff entered into a three year Employment Agreement (the "Agreement") with Defendant effective January 1, 2009. The Agreement provided Plaintiff with a generous compensation package and also contained a non-competition provision. Prior to the expiration of the Agreement, Defendant terminated Plaintiff's employment. Plaintiff alleged this termination was without cause, thereby entitling her to compensation pursuant to the Agreement. When Defendant refused to pay her the proper compensation, Plaintiff brought the instant action seeking unpaid compensation due under the Agreement as well as a declaration that the non-compete provision in the Agreement is invalid.

Apparently, Plaintiff has requested a voluminous amount of documents. Defendant has not yet produced the documents because it believes a confidentiality order is necessary. As noted above, in the Cornett case, Judge Morris entered the same protective order as Defendant is now proposing. Plaintiff responds that she does not oppose the entry of a protective order. Rather, Plaintiff objects to the provision requiring her to file a motion disputing any confidential designation by Defendant as well as Defendant's interpretation of the protective order as prohibiting Plaintiff's counsel from conversing with counsel in the Cornett case regarding the confidential documents.

II. ANALYSIS1

Pursuant to Rule 26(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court may enter a protective order upon motion of a party for good cause shown. In order to do so, the Court must articulate its reasons sufficient to allow appellate review. In re Alexander Grant & Co. Litigation, 820 F.2d 352, 355-56 (11th Cir. 1987). Additionally, the Court must evaluate and balance the interests of the parties and non-parties concerning dissemination of discovery material. Id. at 357.

Reviewing the positions of the parties and applicable law, the Court finds good cause for the entry of a confidentiality order in this case. Defendant has noted that many of the documents Plaintiff seeks contain "borrower information (such as loan data, social security numbers, etc.), employee information (such as social security numbers, health insurance information, etc.), company bank account information and other detailed financial data not disclosed in public filings, detailed documents (such as confidential manuals and strategy documents) related to LPS' many proprietary technologies, and a host of other records that are not in the public domain or otherwise available to the public." (Doc. 39, p.5). Plaintiff does not contest Defendant's position that many of the documents she seeks should be designated as confidential. Accordingly, the Court finds sufficient good cause exists for the entry of a protective order and further, that the interests of the parties and non-parties concerning dissemination of discovery material outweighs the public's interest in gaining access to the information.

Additionally, the undersigned believes an umbrella protective order, such as the one proposed by the parties, is necessary in this case because a document-by-document review of discovery materials would not be practicable and the order will expedite the flow of discovery material; promote the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality; and facilitate the preservation of truly confidential material, trade secrets, and commercial or proprietary information. Accordingly, the Court finds that entry of a protective order is proper and the only remaining task is to determine which provisions to include in that protective order and the scope of the order.

Plaintiff takes issue with one specific provision in the proposed protective order. Plaintiff believes paragraph 6.3 should be altered. Paragraph 6.3 provides:

Plaintiff acknowledges that this provision is included in the protective order entered in the Cornett case. Plaintiff asks the Court to alter this provision to require Defendant to bring a motion to have a challenged document designated confidential rather than requiring Plaintiff to bring a motion challenging the designation. Neither side points to any caselaw supporting their position and the undersigned was unable to locate any cases directly on point. In reviewing protective orders previously entered, the undersigned found orders directing the challenging party as well as the producing party to apply for Court intervention. As the Court does not believe the procedure outlined in the proposed protective order puts any undue burden on Plaintiff, it will adopt the provision as is.

The Court will advise the parties that by including the provision on judicial intervention, the Court is not granting the parties "free reign to obtain rulings on `confidential' designations." In re Seroquel Products Liability Litigation, No. 3:06-md-1769, 2008 WL 508393, *2 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 21, 2008). Instead, both sides are reminded that pursuant to Local Rule 3.03, "discovery is not to be filed with the Court in the public record, unless it is `necessary to presentation and consideration of a motion to compel, etc.'" Id. (quoting Middle District of Florida, Local Rule 3.03). Accordingly, should Plaintiff choose to challenge a confidential designation, Plaintiff shall not seek judicial intervention unless and until she wishes to utilize the challenged document in a motion to compel or a dispositive motion and seeks to file the document in the public docket of the Court.

Next, Plaintiff contends Defendant's interpretation of the protective order is overly restrictive because it does not permit counsel for Plaintiff to discuss the confidential documents with counsel in the Cornett case. As Plaintiff points out, the protective order does not explicitly prohibit counsel for Plaintiff from discussing the confidential documents with counsel in the Cornett case, especially if counsel in the Cornett case already has a copy of the relevant confidential document. Instead, the protective order prohibits counsel from disclosing any confidential documents to individuals not involved in this litigation.

The Court would be more inclined to agree with Defendant's position if Plaintiff were requesting to share the documents themselves with another attorney who did not have access to the documents. This is true because "the more widely confidential documents are disseminated, it becomes both more likely that those documents will be released, and more difficult for the Court to enforce the terms of its protective order." Williams v. Taser Intern., Inc., No. 1:06-cv-51, 2006 WL 1835437, *2 (N.D. Ga. June 30, 2006). However, in the instant case, Plaintiff is not requesting permission to provide the documents to any other attorney. Instead, Plaintiff's counsel simply wishes to be able to discuss the documents with the attorney in the Cornett case, whom he contends already has the documents. The Court finds such conduct entirely proper. Indeed, the "federal rules [] `do not foreclose collaboration among litigants." Henderson v. FedEx Express, No. 5:09-cv-85, 2009 WL 1951059, *5 (M.D. Ga. July 6, 2009) (quoting Parsons v. General Motors Corp., 85 F.R.D. 724, 726 n. 1 (N.D. Ga. 1980)). Accordingly, the Court will not adopt Defendant's interpretation of the protective order as prohibiting counsel for Plaintiff from discussing confidential materials with counsel for Cornett case, provided counsel for the Cornett case is also in possession of the specific confidential materials at issue.

Accordingly, after due consideration, it is hereby

ORDERED:

1. Defendant, Lender Processing Services's Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 39) is GRANTED. The Court adopts the terms of the proposed Stipulation and Protective Order drafted by Defendant and attached to this Order. The parties are hereby bound by those terms and the interpretation of those terms discussed in this Order.

2. Defendant's Motion to Quash Third Party Subpoena (Doc. 37) is also GRANTED as Plaintiff will be able to obtain the documents directly from Defendant.

DONE AND ORDERED

Plaintiff, MIRIAM U. MOORE ("Plaintiff"), and Defendant, LENDER PROCESSIN SERVICES, INC. ("Defendant"), (collectively the "Parties"), by and through their respective Counsel, stipulate to this Protective Order to protect private and confidential information that may be produced, exchanged, or disclosed by any Party or non-Party in connection with this action (the "Litigation"), including subpoena(s) for documents or testimony, as may be necessary during the pendency of the Litigation, and to address any objection to discovery on the ground of privilege based on privacy, proprietary or confidential information, or trade secrets.

1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS

Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to involve production of confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this Litigation would be warranted. The Parties acknowledge that this Protective Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to treatment as confidential under applicable legal principles and pursuant to the terms of this Protective Order. The Parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 10 below, that this Protective Order creates no automatic entitlement to file confidential information under seal.

2. DEFINITIONS

2.1. Party: any party to this action, including any of its officers, directors, employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel (including Counsel's support staff).

2.2. Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium or manner generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, transcripts, or tangible things) that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery or otherwise provided by a Party to another Party in this matter, including, but not limited to, documents, depositions, deposition exhibits, interrogatory responses, admissions, data and other information (collectively "Discovery Material").

2.3. "CONFIDENTIAL" Information or Items: information (regardless of how generated, stored, or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under standards developed under Florida law. As a general guideline, information or materials designated as "CONFIDENTIAL" shall be those things that may be disclosed to the Parties for the purposes of this Litigation only, and thus must be protected against disclosure to third parties. Examples of such information or materials include materials a Party reasonably and in good faith believes contain or discloses information that the Party, in the ordinary course of business, does not or would not publicly disclose, or information that a Party is under a preexisting obligation to maintain as confidential. Such information may include information pertaining to Defendant, Lender Processing Services, Inc., its subsidiaries, divisions, affiliates and any employees of those entities, as well as Plaintiff. Absent a specific order by this Court, once designated as "CONFIDENTIAL," such designated information shall be used by the Parties and their Counsel solely in connection with this Litigation, and not for any business, competitive, or governmental purpose or function, and such information shall not be disclosed to anyone except as provided herein.

2.4. Receiving Party: a Party that receives Discovery Material from a Producing Party.

2.5. Producing Party: a Party or non-Party that produces Discovery Material in this action.

2.6. Designating Party: a Party or non-Party that designates information or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery "CONFIDENTIAL."

2.7. Protected Material: any Discovery Material that is designated as "CONFIDENTIAL."

2.8. Outside Counsel: attorneys who are not employees of a Party but who are retained to represent or advise a Party or a non-Party in this action (as well as their support staff assisting said attorneys).

2.9. Counsel (without qualified: Outside Counsel and attorneys who are employees for a Party or a non-party (as well as their support staff assisting said attorneys).

2.10. 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 consultant in this action and who is not a current employee of a Party, a past employee of any other Party, or a cuirent employee of any other Party, and who, at the time of retention, is not anticipated to become an employee of a Party or a competitor of any other Party. This definition includes a professional jury or trial consultant retained in connection with this litigation.

2.11. Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services (e.g., photocopying; videotaping; translating; preparing exhibits or demonstrations; organizing, storing, retrieving data in any form or medium; etc.) and their employees and subcontractors.

3. SCOPE

The protections conferred by this Protective Order cover only Protected Material (as defined above), and information copied or extracted from Protected Material, as well as all copies, excerpts, summaries, testimony referring to Protected Material, or compilations thereof.

4. DURATION

Even after the termination of the Litigation, the confidentiality obligations imposed by this Protective Order shall remain in effect until a Designating Party agrees otherwise in writing or a Court order otherwise directs.

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. A Designating Party must take reasonable care to 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 routine designations are prohibited, absent justification for such designation by the Designating Party. The Parties agree to designate Discovery Material as Protected Material in good faith and for a proper purpose. If it comes to a Party's or a non-Party's attention that information or items that it designated for protection do not qualify for protection at all, or do not qualify for the level of protection initially asserted, that Party or nonparty must promptly notify all other parties that it is withdrawing the mistaken 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(b), below), or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, 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:

5.2(a) For information in documentary form (apart from transcripts of depositions or other pretrial or trial proceedings), that the Producing Party affix the legend "CONFIDENTIAL" on each page that contains Protected Material. A Party or non-Party that makes original documents or materials available for inspection need not designate them for protection until after the inspecting Party has indicated which material 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 Order, then, before producing the specified documents, the Producing Party must affix the appropriate legend ("CONFIDENTIAL") on each page that contains Protected Material.

5.2(b) For testimony given in deposition or in other pretrial or trial proceedings, that the Party or non-Party offering or sponsoring the testimony may identify on the record, before the close of the deposition, hearing, or other proceeding, any protected testimony, and may further specify any portions of the testimony as well as any exhibits that qualify as "CONFIDENTIAL." Alternatively, the Party or non-Party that sponsors, offers, or gives the testimony (and/or presents any exhibits at issue) may invoke on the record (before the deposition or proceeding is concluded) a right to provide written notice of designation of Protected Materials by Counsel to all Parties within fourteen (14) days after receipt by Counsel of the official transcript of the deposition (and any relevant exhibits) from the court reporter (the "Grace Period"), and to thereafter designate any such testimony (and/or exhibits) as Protected Materials by identifying the specific portions of the testimony (and/or exhibits) as to which protection is sought before the expiration of Grace Period.

Only those portions of the testimony that are appropriately designated for protection within the Grace Period shall be covered by the provisions of this Protective Order. If Counsel invokes this section before the deposition or proceeding is concluded, then the Parties bound by this Protective Order shall treat the deposition testimony and any documents produced or identified at the deposition as "CONFIDENTIAL" until the expiration of Grace Period. The Parties may modify this procedure for any particular deposition or proceeding through agreement on the record at such deposition or proceeding or otherwise by written stipulation, without further order of the Court. Transcript pages containing Protected Material must be separately bound by the court reporter, who must affix to the top of each such page the legend "CONFIDENTIAL" as instructed by the Party or non-Party offering or sponsoring the witness presenting the testimony.

5.2(c) For information produced in some form other than documentary, 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 or item is stored the legend "CONFIDENTIAL." If only portions of the information or item warrant protection, the Producing Party, to the extent practicable, shall identify the protected portions.

5.3. Inadvertent Failures to Designate: If timely corrected, an inadvertent failure to designate qualified information or items as "CONFIDENTIAL" does not, standing alone, waive the Designating Party's right to secure protection under this Protective Order for such material. If material is appropriately designated as "CONFIDENTIAL" after the material was initially produced, the Receiving Party, on timely notification of the designation, must make reasonable efforts to assure that the material is treated in accordance with the provisions of this Protective Order.

6. CHALLENGING CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS

6.1. Timing of Challenges: Unless a prompt challenge to a Designating Party's confidentiality designation is necessary to avoid foreseeable substantial unfairness, unnecessary economic burdens, or a later significant disruption or delay of the Litigation, a Party does not waive its right to challenge a confidentiality designation by electing not to mount a challenge promptly after the original designation is disclosed.

6.2. Meet and Confer: A Party that elects to initiate a challenge to a Designating Party's confidentiality designation must do so in good faith and must begin the process by conferring in good faith directly (in writing, in person or by telephone) with Counsel for the Designating Party. In conferring, the challenging Party must explain the basis for its belief that the confidentiality designation was not proper and must give the Designating Party a reasonable opportunity to review the designated material, to reconsider the circumstances, and, if no change in designation is offered, to explain the basis for the chosen designation, A challenging Party may proceed to the next stage of the challenge process only if it has engaged in good faith in this meet-and-confer process first.

6.3. Judicial Intervention: A Party that elects to press a challenge to a confidentiality designation after considering the justification offered by the Designating Party may file and serve a motion that identifies the challenged material and sets forth in detail the basis for the challenge. Each such motion must be accompanied by a competent declaration that affirms that the movant has complied with the meet-and-confer requirements imposed in the preceding paragraph and that sets forth with specificity the justification for the confidentiality designation that was given by the Designating Party in the meet-and-confer dialogue. The burden of persuasion in any such challenge proceeding shall be on the Designating Party. Until the Court rules on the challenge, 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.

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 case only for prosecuting, defending, or attempting to settle this Litigation. Such Protected Material may be disclosed only to the categories of persons and under the conditions described in this Protective Order. When the Litigation has been terminated, a Receiving Party must comply with the provisions of Section 11 ("FINAL DISPOSITION") of the Protective Order.

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, any Designating and Receiving Party may disclose any information or item designated CONFIDENTIAL only to:

8. PROTECTED MATERIAL SUBPOENAED OR ORDERED PRODUCED IN OTHER LITIGATION

8.1. If a Receiving Party is served with a subpoena or an order issued in other litigation that would compel disclosure of any information or items designated in this action as "CONFIDENTIAL" the Receiving Party must immediately so notify the Designating Party, in writing (by e-mail or fax, if possible) and in any event within a reasonable amount of time to permit the Designating Party to raise objections to any production of such information after receiving the subpoena or order. Such notification must include a copy of the subpoena or Court order.

8.2. The Receiving Party also must promptly inform in writing the Party who caused the subpoena or order to issue in the other litigation that some or all the material covered by the subpoena or order is the subject of this Protective Order. In addition, the Receiving Party must deliver a copy of this Protective Order promptly to the Party in the other action that caused the subpoena or order to issue.

8.3. The purpose of imposing these duties is to alert the interested parties to the existence of this Protective Order and to afford the Designating Party in this case an opportunity to protect its confidentiality interests in the court from which the subpoena or order issued. The Designating Party shall bear the burdens and the expenses 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. 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 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.

10. FILING PROTECTED MATERIAL

Confidential Information shall not be filed as a matter of course with the Court, but only when necessary for consideration by the Court of trier of fact and deemed by counsel to be necessary for the proper presentation of a pending motion, claim or defense. Any documents, materials, information, exhibits, answers to interrogatories, responses to requests for admissions, or transcripts of deposition testimony which comprise or contain information designated as "CONFIDENTIAL," or any pleading, motion, or memorandum purporting to reproduce or paraphrase such Confidential Information, pursuant to Local Rule 1.09. Should the Court grant the party's motion to file under seal, a party submitting a motion to file under seal before any applicable filing deadline shall be permitted to supplement after the deadline, as long as such supplementation under seal is submitted within the time provided by the Court's order. Nothing in this Confidentiality Agreement shall restrict the use of any Confidential Information at any hearing or the trial of this cause: provided that any party reserves the right lo request that the Court utilize appropriate procedures for the protection of Confidential Information to prevent public disclosure of Confidential Information.

11. FINAL DISPOSITION

11.1. Unless otherwise ordered or agreed in writing by the Producing Party, within sixty (60) days after the final termination of this action, including any appeals, each Receiving Party must return all Protected Material to the Producing Party. As used in this subdivision, "all Protected Material" includes all copies, abstracts, compilations, summaries or any other form of reproducing or capturing any of the Protected Material. With permission in writing from the Designating Party, the Receiving Party may destroy some or all of the Protected Material instead of returning it. 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 person or entity, to the Designating Party) by the 60-day deadline that identifies (by category, where appropriate) all the Protected Material that was returned or destroyed and that affirms that the Receiving Party has not retained any copies, abstracts, compilations, summaries or other forms of reproducing or capturing any of the Protected Material.

11.2. Notwithstanding this provision, Counsel are entitled to retain an archival copy of all pleadings, motion papers, transcripts, legal memoranda, correspondence or attorney 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"), above.

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 Stipulated 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. Amendments: This Protective Order may only be amended by written agreement of the Parties in the form of a written stipulation or by the Court upon a motion by any Party or on its own initiative.

12.4. Parties' Agreement To Be Bound: The Parties agree to be bound by the terms of this Protective Order pending its entry by the Court, or pending the entry of an alternative thereto which is satisfactory to both Parties and affected non-parties, and any violation of its terms shall be subject to the same sanctions and penalties as if the Protective Order had been entered by the Court.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

UPON THE FOREGOING STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED

EXHIBIT A TO THE STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

I, ______________________________________, have read and understand the STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER ("Protective Order") entered by order of the United States District Court, Middle District of Florida, in this action, agree to abide by the contents thereof and submit to the jurisdiction of said Court for purposes of enforcement of my obligations under the Protective Order. I understand and agree that 1 shall not use or disclose, in public or private, any Protected Material or information contained therein or information derived therefrom without the prior written consent of the designating party or as otherwise set forth in the Order or permitted or required by an order of the Court. I agree that I will not keep any originals or copies of documents or other materials designated CONFIDENTIAL for any purpose, unless such documents or other materials were in my possession prior to the commencement of this litigation,

I declare under penally of perjury under the laws of the State of Florida that the foregoing is true and correct.