Loading…
The language the complex departments require in stipulated protective orders: a challenge to a confidentiality designation at any time; written notice and a meet and confer in voice to voice dialogue within 10 days of the notice; an informal in-person conference with the Court; the Designating Party's motion to retain confidentiality within 10 days of that conference (or the designation is waived), with a declaration of compliance; the burden of persuasion on the Designating Party; sanctions for frivolous challenges; fees to the successful party; and protection until the court rules.
California > First Appellate District > San Francisco County > Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO COMPLEX LITIGATION CHALLENGING CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS Timing of Challenges. Any Party or Non-Party may challenge a designation of confidentiality at any time. Unless a prompt challenge to a Designating Party’s confidentiality designation is necessary to avoid foreseeable, substantial unfairness, unnecessary economic burdens, or a significant disruption or delay of the litigation, a Party does not waive its right to challenge a confidentiality designation by electing not to mount a challenge promptly after the original designation is disclosed. Meet and Confer. The Challenging Party shall initiate the dispute resolution process by providing written notice of the designations it is challenging and generally describing the basis for the challenges. To avoid ambiguity as to whether a challenge has been made, the written notice must recite that the challenge to confidentiality is being made in accordance with this specific paragraph of the Protective Order. The parties shall attempt to resolve each challenge in good faith and must begin the process by conferring directly (in voice to voice dialogue; other forms of communication are not sufficient) within 10 days of the date of service of notice. In conferring, the Challenging Party must explain the basis for its belief that the confidentiality designation was not proper and must give the Designating Party an opportunity to review the designated material, to reconsider the circumstances, and, if no change in designation is offered, to explain the basis for the chosen designation. A Challenging Party may proceed to the next stage of the challenge process only if it has engaged in this meet and confer process first or establishes that the Designating Party is unwilling to participate in the meet and confer process in a timely manner. Judicial Intervention. If the Parties cannot resolve a challenge without court intervention through the procedure set forth above, they must hold an informal in-person conference with the Court. If the Parties still cannot resolve the challenge, the Designating Party shall file and serve a motion to retain confidentiality within 10 days of the informal in-person conference. Each such motion must be accompanied by a competent declaration affirming that the movant has complied with the meet and confer requirements imposed in the preceding paragraph. Failure by the Designating Party to timely make such a motion shall automatically waive the confidentiality designation for each challenged designation. In addition, the Challenging Party may file a motion challenging a confidentiality designation at any time if there is good cause for doing so, including a challenge to the designation of a deposition transcript or any portions thereof. Any motion brought pursuant to this provision must be accompanied by a competent declaration affirming that the movant has complied with the meet and confer requirements imposed by the preceding paragraph. The burden of persuasion in any such challenge proceeding shall be on the Designating Party. The Court recommends that the parties obtain a court reporter for the hearing on this motion. Frivolous challenges, and those made for an improper purpose (e.g., to harass or impose unnecessary expenses and burdens on other parties) may expose the Challenging Party to sanctions. The party losing any motion concerning the confidentiality of materials will pay the successful party’s attorneys’ fees incurred in the making of or opposing the motion if the losing position was not substantially justified. Unless the Designating Party has waived the confidentiality designation by failing to file a motion to retain confidentiality as described above, all parties shall continue to afford the material in question the level of protection to which it is entitled under the Producing Party’s designation until the court rules on the challenge. Challenging Confidentiality Designations
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO COMPLEX LITIGATION CHALLENGING CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS Timing of Challenges. Any Party or Non-Party may challenge a designation of confidentiality at any time. Unless a prompt challenge to a Designating Party’s confidentiality designation is necessary to avoid foreseeable, substantial unfairness, unnecessary economic burdens, or a significa
Reviewer note: Composed 2026-10-08 (California T4 San Francisco build 2026-10-08) from BenchPath custody ca/t4/ca-san-francisco/docs/general/challenging-confidentiality-designations.pdf (116272 bytes, sha256 6c93872a244f0426b43b574069933ece89bf51f6d7a3822a25ad701d445747eb; 2 pages) with the shared verbatim composer (v2 reflow): page marks and running headers or footers removed as chrome; lines reflowed into the document's paragraphs; proof 1 (whitespace-only) and proof 2 (same character multiset as the text layer minus chrome) pass.
6 verbatim requirements on divisional requirements in GIUSEPPINA MIRANDA's division.
4 verbatim requirements on divisional requirements in HILARY CREARY's division.
2 verbatim requirements on divisional requirements in NATASHA DEPRIMO's division.