Mafille et al v. Kaiser-Francis Oil Company, No. 4:2018cv00586 - Document 33 (N.D. Okla. 2019)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Frank H McCarthy ; granting 19 Motion for Protective Order (tjc, Dpty Clk)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Mafille et al v. Kaiser-Francis Oil Company Doc. 33 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA MARLANA MAFILLE and CHRISTOPHER MAFILLE, Plaintiffs, vs. Case No. 18-CV-586-TCK-FHM KAISER-FRANCIS OIL COMPANY, Defendant. OPINION AND ORDER Defendant’s Motion for Highly Confidential Protective Order, [Dkt. 19], is before the court for decision. The matter has been fully briefed, [Dkt. 19, 25, 30]. Defendant seeks entry of a modified version of the court’s form protective order which will enable it to designate some materials produced in discovery that Defendant considers to be confidential or sensitive business materials as “highly confidential” and to thereby prevent the disclosure of designated materials to Plaintiff Christopher Mafille. The reason for such restriction is that Mr. Mafille is employed by a competitor of Defendant. Plaintiffs object to the ability of Defendant to prevent disclosure of discovery materials to Mr. Mafille. Plaintiffs assert that Defendant has not shown the good cause necessary for entry of such an order. The court finds that Mr. Mafille’s employment with Defendant’s competitor constitutes good cause for the entry of the requested protective order. The court routinely enters protective orders for the protection of such information. The use of such a protective order generally serves to speed up the production of documents and thus aids in the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of the matters at issue as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 1. Further, as specified in the Protective Order at Paragraph 8 “Objections Dockets.Justia.com to Designations,” a party may challenge a designation made under the protective order and, after the parties have consulted in an attempt to resolve the matter, the court will resolve the actual disputes that arise. Defendant’s Motion for Highly Confidential Protective Order, [Dkt. 19], is GRANTED. The court has entered a Protective Order herewith. SO ORDERED this day of March, 2019. 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
