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.

Traffas v. Biomet, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Kansas

July 19, 2019

PATRICIA A. TRAFFAS, Plaintiff,
v.
BIOMET, INC., et al., Defendants.

          MAGLIO CHRISTOPHER & TOALE P.A, Altom M. Maglio Ilyas Sayeg, Altom M. Maglio Ilyas Sayeg Attorneys for Plaintiff

          FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP Tom Joensen (admitted pro hac vice) Stephanie A. Koltookian (admitted pro hac vice), Michelle M. Tessier, BAKER STERCHI COWDEN & RICE LLC Kara T. Stubbs, Attorneys for Defendants

          STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO CONFIDENTIALITY AND DISCOVERY AGREEMENT

         This Stipulated Protective Order as to Confidentiality and Discovery Agreement (“CDA”), intended by the Parties to be approved and adopted by Order of the Court, is made and entered into by and between all Plaintiffs and all Defendants in litigation filed in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, involving M2a Metal on Metal hip implants. Plaintiffs and Defendants are individually referred to as “Party” and collectively referred to as “Parties.”

         WHEREAS:

- Each Party desires the efficient exchange of information during the discovery phase of this litigation;
- Each Party recognizes that substantial discovery has already been produced by Defendants in previous and concurrent litigations involving similar M2a Metal on Metal hip implants in other jurisdictions;
- Each Party recognizes that disclosure, here, of discovery produced in other M2a Metal on Metal hip implant litigations will help avoid unnecessary and inefficient discovery disputes;
- Each Party agrees that Defendants' discovery productions may contain third-party private health information, trade secrets, or other information belonging to Defendants which may be confidential under applicable law;
- Defendants, as for-profit businesses, have an interest in keeping their trade secrets and other confidential, research, development, competitive, commercial, marketing, financial, sales, licensing, or other proprietary or business information confidential and protected to the extent allowed under Kansas law;
- Each Party desires to execute a CDA that comports with Kansas law while at the same time providing procedures and efficiencies that allow the exchange of information without over- burdening this Court; THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:

         I. STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO CONFIDENTIALITY

         1) The Parties agree that this Protective Order does not supersede Kansas law and that the confidentiality protections provided by this Protective Order apply only to documents and information not required to be public under Kansas law.

         2) This CDA applies to all information, documents, and things subject to discovery in this action, including discovery already produced or to be produced and discovery deemed produced as if taken in this litigation, if any.

         3) The Parties acknowledge that Documents exchanged in this litigation may contain Defendants' trade secret information or other information belonging to Defendants as well as medical records belonging to Plaintiffs which may be confidential under applicable law (such information described herein as “Confidential”). Such documents shall hereafter be referred to as “Confidential Document(s)”.

         4) The Parties agree that a Party's designation of “Confidential Document” shall be made only after a bona fide determination that the material is in fact a Confidential Document.

a. Nothing in this paragraph may be interpreted as requiring new individualized determinations of such documents' confidentiality in the absence of a challenge pursuant to the procedure set forth in Paragraph 14.

         5) The Parties agree to produce Confidential Documents only upon the condition that they remain Confidential, according to the terms of this CDA, unless otherwise ordered by the court.

         6) The Parties agree that if a “Confidential Document” also contains information that is not protected from disclosure under applicable law, only the portions of the Confidential Document that are Confidential will be protected according to the terms of this CDA.

         7) The Parties agree that any Party or third party may designate any document(s) as Confidential by placing or affixing thereon, in such manner as will not interfere with the reasonable legibility of the materials, the following notice, or an otherwise similar appropriate notice: “Confidential Material Subject to Confidentiality Order.” The designation shall be made prior to, or contemporaneously with, production or disclosure of that material.

         8) All copies, duplicates, extracts, summaries or descriptions (collectively “copies”), of documents designated as Confidential under this CDA or any portion of such a document, shall be immediately affixed with the designation “Confidential Material Subject to Confidentiality Order” (or similar language) if a designation to this ...


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.