Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Metellus v. Wilson

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division, Dayton

October 31, 2017

JOHNATHAN METELLUS, Plaintiff,
v.
HEATHER WILSON, SECRETARY OF THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE, et al., Defendants.

          FOR THE PLAINTIFF: Serah E. Siemann Siemann & Associates Co., L.P.A.

          FOR THE DEFENDANT: Kevin Koller Assistant United States Attorney.

          District Judge, Thomas M. Rose

          PROTECTIVE ORDER

          SHARON L. OVINGTON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Because discovery in the above-captioned case involves confidential information covered by the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 522a, including the contents of personnel files of persons employed or formerly employed by the United States Air Force, it is hereby ordered that the following restrictions and procedures shall apply to certain information, documents, and excerpts from documents supplied by the parties to each other in response to discovery requests:

         1. Counsel for any party may designate any document, information contained in a document, information revealed in an interrogatory response, or information revealed during a deposition as confidential if counsel determines, in good faith, that such information is covered by the Privacy Act or that such designation is necessary to protect the interests of the client. Information and documents designated by a party as confidential will be stamped “CONFIDENTIAL.” “Confidential” information or documents may be referred to collectively as “Confidential Information.”

         2. Unless ordered by the Court, or otherwise provided for herein, the Confidential Information disclosed will be held and used by the person receiving such information solely for use in connection with the above-captioned action.

         3. In the event a party challenges another party's confidential designation, counsel shall make a good faith effort to resolve the dispute, and in the absence of a resolution, the challenging party may thereafter seek resolution by the Court. Nothing in this Stipulation and Order constitutes an admission by any party that Confidential Information disclosed in this case is relevant or admissible. Each party specifically reserves the right to object to the use or admissibility of all Confidential Information disclosed, in accordance with applicable law and Court rules.

         4. Information or documents designated as “confidential” shall not be disclosed to any person, except:

a. The requesting party and counsel, including agency counsel;
b. Employees of such counsel assigned to and necessary to assist in the litigation;
c. Consultants or experts assisting in the prosecution or defense of the matter, to the extent deemed necessary by counsel;
d. Any person from whom testimony is taken or is to be taken in these actions, except that such a person may only be shown that Confidential Information during and in preparation for his/her testimony and may not retain the Confidential Information; and
e. The Court (including any clerk, stenographer, or other person having access to any Confidential Information by virtue of his or her position with the Court) or the jury ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.