Dotson v. Experian Info. Solutions, Inc.

Dotson v. Experian Info. Solutions, Inc.

Opinion

ORDER

Several motions are pending before the Court.¹ The motions involve two central issues. The first is the entry of a protective order [*2]  to protect confidential and proprietary information. The second is Plaintiff's requests for production and Rule 30(b)(6) notice topics. Upon consideration of these filings, the Court finds no need for a hearing, and issues its ruling.

A. Protective Order

On November 26, 2018, the parties submitted a joint motion and brief in support of a protective order [Doc. No. 51]. Plaintiff's signature, noting his agreement with the terms, was shown on page six of the proposed protective order. [Doc. No. 51-1 at 6]. On December 3, 2018 the Court, noting a few minor necessary changes, denied without prejudice the parties' proposed Stipulated Protective Order. [Doc. No. 53].

Despite his earlier indication to the Court in the Joint Status Report [Doc. No. 40 at 6] that a protective order was needed to govern the production of confidential information and his agreement to the earlier version of the proposed protective order [Doc. No. 51-1], Plaintiff is now opposed to Defendant's revised proposed protective order [Doc. No. 59-1]. Defendant asserts that the revised version addresses the Court's limited concerns, and that there is good cause for a protective order governing the production of confidential and proprietary [*3]  information. Plaintiff's issues with the revised version are addressed in his motion for a hearing at pages one through five. [Doc. No. 54 at 1-5].

The Court will address, sequentially, the following: (1) whether there is good cause for a protective order; (2) Plaintiff's concerns with the revised version; and (3) whether Defendant's revised version is acceptable.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.