6:18-cv-02016-JMC Date Filed 11/18/19 Entry Number 69 Page 1 of 3
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
`GREENVILLE DIVISION
`
`
`
`ZIPIT WIRELESS, INC.
`
`
`vs.
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant
`
`
`
`) Civil Action No. 6:18-cv-02016-JMC
`)
`
`)
`) MOTION FOR ENTRY OF
`) CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER
`)
`
`)
`
`)
`)
`
`
`
`CONSENT:
`
`
`
`
`The attached proposed Confidentiality Order is requested:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`by consent of all parties.
`
`by consent as to some, but not all, of the terms [alternative provisions are set forth
`in both proposed and redlined versions].
`
`by some, but not all, parties .
`
`
`
`
`CONTENT:
`
`
`
`
`The attached proposed Confidentiality Order:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`is identical to the standard form on the court’s website.
`
`has been revised by deleting the Reading Room provision, but no other changes
`have been made (redlined copy not required).
`
`
`
`
`
`is a modified version of the standard form on the court’s website and the
`modifications have been indicated by attaching a “redlined” copy the document.
`An explanation of the basis for each proposed modification is as follows:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Zipit Wireless Inc. and Defendant LG Electronics, Inc. (the “parties”) hereby
`
`move pursuant to Rule 37 Fed. R. Civ. P. for entry of a protective order governing the handling
`
`1
`
`
`

`

`6:18-cv-02016-JMC Date Filed 11/18/19 Entry Number 69 Page 2 of 3
`
`of “Confidential” and “Highly Confidential” information exchanged during the initial phase of
`
`the action to determine if the Court may exercise jurisdiction. The parties agreed to the attached
`
`proposed confidentiality order, which largely tracks the model order used in this District. See
`
`Exhibit A (Redline version); Exhibit B (version accepted redline). The modifications to the
`
`model order are as follows.
`
`
`Modified provisions agreed to by the parties:
`
`1) This order applies only to the jurisdictional discovery permitted by the Court. See ECF No.
`60. (¶ 1)
`—This modification allows for a more streamlined order, and a second protective order may
`be sought should the case proceed in this Court.
`
`2) Documents may be designated HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,
`(passim & ¶¶ 2(b), 5(c)).
`—The parties agree that some information should be treated as highly confidential and thus
`provided only to attorneys for the parties and certain other limited individuals.
`
`
`3) Confidentiality designations may be made more than seven days after the deposition upon a
`showing of good cause. (¶ 4)
`—This is a limited exception to the time limits on designations.
`
`4) Deposition transcripts are treated as Highly Confidential until the expiration of the seven-day
`period, unless otherwise agreed. (¶ 4)
`—This provides confidentiality for deposition transcripts until designations may be made.
`
`
`5) Confidential documents may be disclosed to certain witnesses at their deposition and the
`author of the document. (¶¶ 5(b)(5), 5(b)(6))
`—This may streamline and facilitate deposition examinations.
`
`6) At the conclusion of the litigation, confidential documents may be destroyed or returned at
`the producing party’s expense. (¶ 9(b))
`— This clarifies the options available to the parties regarding designated information at the
`end of the litigation.
`
`7) A third party may invoke the provisions of this Order. (¶ 10)
`— This provides that a third party that produces information or is deposed in this case may
`invoke the provisions of this Order.
`
`8) Procedures are laid out that apply if designated materials are sought in other litigation. (¶ 11)
`
`2
`
`
`

`

`6:18-cv-02016-JMC Date Filed 11/18/19 Entry Number 69 Page 3 of 3
`
`— This provides procedures that a party must follow if it possesses designated materials that
`are sought in other litigation, which may allow the producing party the opportunity to seek
`protection.
`
`9) Procedures are laid out that apply in the event designated materials are inadvertently
`disclosed. (¶ 12)
`— This provides procedures that a party must follow if it inadvertently discloses designated
`materials.
`
`
`
`
`Dated November 18, 2019
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Keith D. Munson
`Keith D. Munson (Fed. ID No. 6843)
`Keith.munson@wbd-us.com
`WOMBLE BOND DICKINSON (US) LLP
`550 South Main Street, Suite 400
`Greenville, South Carolina 29601
`Telephone: (864) 255-5412
`Facsimile: (864) 239-5480
`
`
`Michael S. Kwun (pro hac vice)
`mkwun@kblfirm.com
`Asim M. Bhansali (pro hac vice)
`abhansali@kblfirm.com
`Kate E. Lazarus (pro hac vice)
`klazarus@kblfirm.com
`KWUN BHANSALI LAZARUS LLP
`555 Montgomery Street
`Suite 750
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`Telephone: (415) 630-2350
`Facsimile: (415) 367-1539
`
`Attorneys for Defendant LG Electronics,
`Inc.
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`