Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Plaintiff Richard C. Colyear filed suit against Chicago Title Insurance Company and Does 1 through 25 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (Case No. 2:26-cv-03148-MWF-RAO). The parties anticipated that discovery would involve production of confidential, proprietary, or private information, including plaintiff's tax returns and tax filings, defendant's financial records, trade secrets, and annual filings with governmental entities. To expedite the flow of information and protect materials entitled to confidential treatment, the parties stipulated to a protective order and petitioned the court to enter it.
The stipulation acknowledges that the order does not confer blanket protection on all disclosures and that protection extends only to information qualifying under applicable legal principles. The parties further acknowledged the procedures for filing under seal under Local Civil Rule 79-5, citing Ninth Circuit authority that good cause must be shown for sealing non-dispositive motions and compelling reasons for dispositive motions or trial. The order was signed by counsel for both parties on October 21, 2026, and entered by Magistrate Judge Rozella A. Oliver on October 23, 2026.
The Court’s Holding
The court entered the Stipulated Protective Order, which defines "CONFIDENTIAL" information as material qualifying for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), including confidential business or financial information, trade secrets, and private third-party information. The order establishes a single tier of confidentiality and requires designating parties to exercise restraint, prohibiting mass or indiscriminate designations. Designations must be made before production, with specific marking requirements for documents, deposition testimony, and tangible items. Inadvertent failures to designate do not waive protection if timely corrected.
The order permits receiving parties to use protected material solely for prosecuting, defending, or settling the action. Disclosure is limited to enumerated categories: outside counsel and their staff, party officers and employees (including house counsel), retained experts and consultants who sign an acknowledgment, the court and its personnel, court reporters, professional vendors, authors or custodians of documents, deposition witnesses, and mediators. If protected material is subpoenaed in other litigation, the receiving party must notify the designating party and cooperate in seeking protection. After final disposition, receiving parties must return or destroy all protected material within 60 days of a written request, though counsel may retain archival copies of work product and pleadings subject to the order's continuing restrictions. Violations may result in contempt proceedings and monetary sanctions.
Key Takeaways
- The protective order creates a single confidentiality tier ("CONFIDENTIAL") covering tax returns, financial records, trade secrets, and other proprietary information, with mandatory good-faith designation standards and sanctions for over-designation.
- Receiving parties may disclose protected material only to specified categories of individuals—including counsel, party employees, experts, and vendors—all of whom must sign an acknowledgment agreeing to be bound by the order.
- The order does not govern use of protected material at trial; such use is subject to the trial judge's orders, and confidentiality protections presumptively end at trial commencement unless compelling reasons are shown.
- Parties must comply with Local Civil Rule 79-5 to file protected material under seal; mere designation as confidential does not constitute good cause for sealing.
- After final disposition, protected material must be returned or destroyed within 60 days of a written request, with a certification of compliance, though counsel may retain archival copies of work product and pleadings.
Why It Matters
This stipulated protective order provides a comprehensive framework for managing confidential discovery in a federal title insurance dispute, balancing the parties' need for information exchange with protection of sensitive financial and proprietary data. The order reflects standard Central District of California practices, incorporating Ninth Circuit sealing standards and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) and 26(b)(5)(B) procedures for inadvertent production. Its detailed provisions on designation, challenge, access, and post-litigation disposition serve as a practical template for similar commercial litigation in the district.