Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Florence v. Brand Energy Services, LLC

United States District Court, D. Kansas

September 26, 2014

CYNTHIA FLORENCE, Plaintiff,
v.
BRAND ENERGY SERVICES, LLC, et al., Defendants.

Sean M. Sturdivan, Daniel L. Doyle, Tucker L. Poling, Sanders Warren & Russell, LLP, Overland Park, KS, Attorney for Plaintiff.

Alan L. Rupe, Jordan J. Ford, KUTAK ROCK LLP, Wichita, KS, Thomas O. McCarthy, McMAHON BERGER, P.C., St. Louis, MO, Attorneys for Defendant.

AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER

JAMES P. O'HARA, Magistrate Judge.

The parties agree that during the course of discovery it may be necessary to disclose certain confidential information relating to the subject matter of this action. They agree that certain categories of such information should be treated as confidential, protected from disclosure outside this litigation, and used only for purposes of prosecuting or defending this action and any appeals. The parties jointly request entry of this proposed Protective Order to limit the disclosure, dissemination, and use of certain identified categories of confidential information.

The parties assert in support of their request that protection of the identified categories of confidential information is necessary because certain information that is relevant to Plaintiff's allegations and to Defendant's defenses may contain confidential employment, personal and/or financial information concerning Plaintiff, and personnel and/or confidential information regarding other current and/or former employees of Defendant. Moreover, some of the documents may contain trade secrets and/or confidential business information of Defendant.

For good cause shown under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c), the court grants the parties' joint request and hereby enters the following Protective Order:

1. Scope. All documents and materials produced in the course of discovery of this case, including initial disclosures, responses to discovery requests, all deposition testimony and exhibits, and information derived directly therefrom (hereinafter collectively "documents"), are subject to this Order concerning Confidential Information as set forth below. Since there is a presumption in favor of open and public judicial proceedings in the federal courts, this Order will be strictly construed in favor of public disclosure and open proceedings wherever possible.

2. Definition of Confidential Information. As used in this Order, "Confidential Information" is defined as information that the producing party designates in good faith has been previously maintained in a confidential manner and should be protected from disclosure and use outside the litigation because its disclosure and use is restricted by statute or could potentially cause harm to the interests of disclosing party or nonparties. For purposes of this Order, the parties will limit their designation of "Confidential Information" to the following categories of information or documents:

• medical records;
• personnel files/records;
• tax returns;
• financial statements/records;
• proprietary business records; and
• trade secrets.

Information or documents that are available to the public may not be designated as Confidential Information.

3. Form and Timing of Designation. The producing party may designate documents as containing Confidential Information and therefore subject to protection under this Order by marking or placing the words "CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" (hereinafter "the marking") on the document and on all copies in a manner that will not interfere with the legibility of the document. As used in this Order, "copies" includes electronic images, duplicates, extracts, summaries or descriptions that contain the Confidential Information. The marking will be applied prior to or at the time of the documents are produced or disclosed. Applying the marking to a document does not mean that the document has any status or protection by statute or otherwise except to the extent and for the purposes of this Order. Copies that are made of any designated documents must also bear the marking, except that indices, electronic databases, or lists of documents that do not contain substantial portions or images of the text of marked documents and do not otherwise disclose the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.