Rodriguez v. Dollar Tree Distribution, Inc.

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRED RODRIGUEZ, No. 2:21-cv-1742 TLN DB 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER DOLLAR TREE DISTRIBUTION, INC., 15 Defendant.

17 On April 15, 2022, the parties filed a proposed stipulated protective order regarding the use of confidential information for the court’s consideration. (ECF No. 8.) The parties’ proposed stipulated protective order states that the filing of confidential material shall “be governed by California Rules of Court, Rules 2.550 and 2.551,” and that such material “shall be separately filed under seal with the clerk . . . WITHOUT ANY FURTHER SEALING ORDER REQUIRED.” (Id. at 9.)

23 The parties are advised that, all documents filed with the court are presumptively public.

24 See San Jose Mercury News, Inc. v. U.S. Dist. Court, 187 F.3d 1096, 1103 (9th Cir. 1999) (“It is well-established that the fruits of pretrial discovery are, in the absence of a court order to the contrary, presumptively public.”). Therefore, documents that are the subject of a protective order may be filed under seal only if a sealing order is first obtained. See Local Rule 141.1. A party seeking to obtain a sealing order shall comply with the provisions of Local Rule 141, which sets forth a specific procedure for seeking a sealing order. After compliance with Local Rule 141, the court will issue an order granting or denying the request to seal. The parties’ proposed stipulated protective order does not acknowledge the need to comply with Local Rule 141.

4 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ April 15, 2022 request for entry of the proposed stipulated protective order (ECF No. 8) is denied without prejudice to renewal.

6 DATED: April 26, 2022 /s/ DEBORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DLB:6 DB\orders\orders.civil\rodriguez1742.stip.protord.den