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.

Sudenga Industries Inc. v. Global Industries Inc.

United States District Court, D. Kansas

October 30, 2018

SUDENGA INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff,
v.
GLOBAL INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant.

          Michael S. Dodig (D.Kan. Bar No. 16660) THE DODIG LAW FIRM, LLC Austen Zuege (MN Bar No. 330, 267) - admitted pro hac vice WESTMAN, CHAMPLIN & KOEHLER, P.A. ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF SUDENGA INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED

          Timothy J. Sear (KS #14813) POLSINELLI PC Jay. E. Heidrick (KS #20770) POLSINELLI PC Keith J. Grady (KS #78132) POLSINELLI PC Matthew L. Cutler (Pro Hac Vice) Douglas A. Robinson (Pro Hac Vice) HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, PLCATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT GLOBAL INDUSTRIES, INC.

          STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

          JAMES P. O'HARA U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c) and D. Kan. Local Patent Rule 2.3, the plaintiff, Sudenga Industries, Incorporated, and the defendant, Global Industries, Inc., have jointly proposed that an order be entered to protect inventions, techniques, know-how, trade secrets, business methods, and confidential financial information likely to be subject to discovery in this case, which involves allegations of patent infringement. The parties agreed to all terms of a protective order except for section 4 below, concerning which the parties presented competing proposals; the court has approved the language proposed by defendant after discussing the competing proposals and the rationale for same with counsel during a scheduling conference on October 30, 2018.

         1. Definitions. As used in this protective order:

(a) “attorney” means an attorney who has appeared in this action;
(b) “confidential document” means a document designated as confidential under this protective order;
(c) to “destroy” electronically stored information means to delete from all databases, applications, and file systems controlled by a party or non-party subject to this order so that the information is not accessible without access to restricted automated backup archives or the use of specialized tools or techniques typically used by a forensic expert;
(d) “document” means information disclosed or produced in discovery, including at a deposition;
(e) “notice” or “notify” means written notice;
(f) “party” means a party to this action;
(g) “protected document” means a document protected by a privilege or the work-product doctrine;
(h) “receiving party” means a party who receives documents produced by another party in this litigation; and
(i) “restricted material” means documents designated as “confidential” or “AEO” (or the like) pursuant to Section 2 below.

         2. Designating a Document or Deposition as Confidential.

(a) A party or non-party disclosing or producing a document may designate it as confidential if the party or non-party contends that it contains confidential or proprietary information. Information and documents that may be designated as confidential include, but are not limited to, trade secrets, confidential or proprietary financial information, operational data, business plans, and competitive analyses, personnel files, personal information that is protected by law, and other sensitive information that, if not restricted as set forth in this order, may subject the producing or disclosing person to competitive or financial injury or potential legal liability to third parties.
(b) A party or non-party may designate a document as confidential by conspicuously marking each page with the word “confidential.” Certain confidential documents may be supplemented with a further designation pursuant to paragraph 2(c).
(c) A party may supplement the “confidential” mark (see paragraph 2(b)) with the words “attorney's eyes only” or the abbreviation “AEO”, in which case a confidential document so designated may not be revealed to another party. The supplemental designation “attorney's eyes only” or “AEO” shall be reserved for highly sensitive information that is believed to be unknown to the opposing party or parties, or any of the employees of a corporate party. For purposes of this order, so-designated information includes, but is not limited to, proprietary computer source code, non-public financial information, non-public pricing information, and non-public customer identification data. The parties shall make reasonable efforts to limit the use of the supplemental designation “attorney's eyes only” or “AEO”.
(d) Deposition testimony may be designated as confidential:
(1) on the record at the deposition; or
(2) after the deposition, by promptly (i.e., within 21 calendar days of receiving the final transcript from the court reporter) notifying the parties and those who were present at the deposition.
(e) If a witness is expected to testify as to confidential or proprietary information, a party or non-party may request that the witness's deposition be taken in the presence of only those ...

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.