Power Buying Dealers Western Region Inc v. Boyd Coffee Company et al
| Power Buying Dealers Western Region Inc |
| Does and Boyd Coffee Company |
| 2:2012cv03492 |
| April 23, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Jay C. Gandhi |
| Stephen V. Wilson |
| Contract: Other |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
138
JUDGMENT ON THE VERDICT FOR DEFENDANT(S) by Judge Stephen V. Wilson. IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff Power Buying Dealers Western Region Inc., take nothing; that the action be dismissed with prejudice; and that the defendant Boyd Coffee Company take nothing. (jp)
|
|
Filing
57
PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jay C. Gandhi, THIS MATTER having come before the Court pursuant to the stipulation of the Parties, and the Court being fully advised, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. PURPOSE AND LIMITATIONS Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of highly sensitive personal, financial, or business information that has not been disseminated to the public at large, which is not readily discoverable by persons, and for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation would be warranted. Unrestricted or unprotected disclosure of such confidential information would result in prejudice or harm to the producing party be revealing the produ cing partys competitive confidential information. Additionally, privacy interests must be safeguarded. Accordingly, the parties have stipulated and petitioned this Court to enter this Stipulated Protective Order. This Order is not intended to be a bl anket protective order protecting every document produced during discovery as discussed in Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F3d 1122 (9th Cir 2003), but rather includes only the financial, marketing, sales, customer, planning, personal, c ommercial, and trade secret (as that term is defined in California Civil Code § 3426.1) information that the producing party in good faith believes falls within the definition of "CONFIDENTIAL" or "CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS' EYE S ONLY." Accordingly, this Order shall apply and govern all Disclosure or Discovery Material that a Designating Party designates as "CONFIDENTIAL" or "CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS EYES ONLY" as hereinafter furnished, directly or in directly, in connection with this action. Specifically, the parties seek to protect from public disclosure information that would provide the parties competitors with an unfair commercial advantage. This Order shall not govern a partys use of its own "CONFIDENTIAL" or "CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS EYES ONLY" Disclosures or Discovery Material. re Joint REQUEST for Protective Order for Discovery - REVISED 53 (SEE ORDER FOR FURTHER DETAILS) (lmh)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
