United States District Court, D. Kansas
Anthony Costello William E. Corum (KS # 17324) R. Anthony
Costello (KS # 21964) HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP Attorneys for
Defendant Aerotek, Inc.
E. Fulcher Darren E. Fulcher (KS # 19373) THE FULCHER FIRM,
P.C., Attorney for Plaintiff Rachel Reinhart.
AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER
P. O'HARA U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
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.
parties assert in support of their request that protection of
the identified categories of confidential information is
necessary because Plaintiff alleges that: (a) she was
deprived of a bonus to which she was entitled; (b)
similarly-situated male employees were not
similarly-deprived; and (c) she suffered financial and
emotional damages. Discovery is likely to involve the
production of information and documents regarding
Aerotek's Sales Compensation Policy, which Aerotek deems
highly confidential and proprietary information, because the
manner and terms in which Aerotek pays its sales employees is
essential to how it attracts and retains internal talent.
Aerotek's compensation policies and philosophies give it
a competitive advantage over other staffing companies in the
is also likely to involve the compensation received by
Plaintiff and current or former employees of Aerotek to whom
Plaintiff will compare herself. These Aerotek employees are
non-parties and trust Aerotek to keep their personal
information confidential. Salary information is private to
each employee and should be held private unless each
employee's personal consent has been granted. The same is
true of any other personal and confidential information found
in such employees' personnel files and other personnel
light of Plaintiff's alleged damages, discovery is also
likely to involve Plaintiff's tax returns and medical
records. Such information is personal and confidential to
Plaintiff and, thus, should be protected.
good cause shown under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c), the court grants
the parties' joint request and hereby enters the
following Protective Order:
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.
As 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.
Definition of Confidential Information.
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 the 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:
a. Aerotek's written Sales Compensation Policy and
closely-related information and documents;
b. The specific compensation paid by Aerotek and received by
other Aerotek Account Managers;
c. Personal and confidential information regarding
non-parties, including that found in the personnel files and
other personnel documents of non-parties;
d. Plaintiff's medical records; and
e. Plaintiff's tax returns.
or documents that are available to the public may not be
designated as Confidential Information.
and Timing of Designation.
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 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 substance of the Confidential
Information are not required to be marked. By marking a
designated document as confidential, the designating attorney
or party appearing pro se thereby certifies that the
document contains Confidential Information as defined in this
Inadvertent Failure to Designate.
failure to designate any document or material as containing
Confidential Information will not constitute a waiver of an
otherwise valid claim of confidentiality pursuant to this
Order, so long as a claim of confidentiality is asserted
within seven (7) days after discovery of the inadvertent