[PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER PRECLUDING PLAINTIFF FROM ATTENDING THE DEPOSITIONS OF RAE MATTEY AND DILLON JORDAN
GAIL J. STANDISH, Magistrate Judge.
TO ALL THE PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
After full consideration of the Amended Stipulation by the parties for a Protective Order filed on June 9, 2017, and FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Pursuant to Federal Rules Civil Procedure 26(c)(1)(E), ADAM NEUWIRTH ("plaintiff") is precluded from being present, in any capacity, at the taking of the depositions of the following third-party individuals:
2. Good cause exists for the entry of this protective order under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(c) which states in pertinent part:
3. That the taking of these depositions is likely to implicate privacy protections afforded to the prospective deponents. Specifically, the individuals from whom defendants seek deposition testimony have an interest in being free from annoyance, harassment, or retaliation in relation to their involvement in this case or the underlying criminal matter which is the subject of this case.
4. That the third-parties and the plaintiff have historically been unable to act civilly with respect to one another and that this order is necessary for the comfort of these witnesses and in an effort to obtain candid deposition testimony unaffected by plaintiff's presence.
5. Further that with respect to at least one of the prospective deponents, there is a Domestic Violence Prevention Restraining Order ("Restraining Order") in place against plaintiff which does not expire until the year 2019.
6. That pursuant to the terms of that Restraining Order, plaintiff is not to contact, either directly or indirectly, by any means, the prospective deponent or be in the immediate vicinity of the deponent restricted to the ordered-upon geographic limits.
7. That the other prospective deponent may have had a critical role in securing the Restraining Order, and this individual too should be similarly protected.
8. That permitting plaintiff to attend the aforementioned depositions would violate the Restraining Order and constitute the type of undue burden contemplated by Rule 26.