United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle
In the Matter of the Application of LUFTHANSA TECHNIK AG, Petitioner, for an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1782 to Take Discovery, Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, of Respondent Panasonic Avionics Corporation for Use in Foreign Proceedings
C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
matter comes before the Court on Petitioner’s unopposed
motion to amend (Dkt. No. 84) the amended protective order
entered by the Court on November 27, 2018 (Dkt. No. 59).
Based on the unopposed motion, the Court hereby GRANTS the
motion and ENTERS the following second amended protective
the disputes between these parties arise in a highly
competitive industry in which constant innovation and
research are necessary, that disclosure of material relating
to innovation and research could cause decided competitive
harm or unfair competitive advantage, and that therefore good
cause exists for entry of a protective order regarding
confidentiality of trade secret or nonpublic technical,
commercial, financial, personal, or business information that
is expected to be produced or provided in the course of
the applicant in this action, Lufthansa Technik AG
(“Lufthansa”), recognizes that in response to its
requests for discovery under 28 U.S.C. § 1782,
Respondent, Panasonic Avionics Corporation
(“Panasonic”), may be required to disclose such
confidential or sensitive business information;
such sensitive information should be treated as confidential,
but not restricted in such a way as would impede
Lufthansa’s ability to use the discovered information
to aid of the aforementioned German proceeding or
THEREFORE, it is hereby ordered as follows:
in this Protective Order, the following definitions apply.
terms “Panasonic” and
“Respondent” refer to Panasonic
terms “Lufthansa” and
“Petitioner” refer to Lufthansa
terms “AES” and
“Intervenor” refer to Astronics
Advanced Electronic Systems Corp.
term “German Proceedings” refers
to Civil Law Proceeding No. 7 O 289/10, before the Mannheim
Regional Court, and any appeals therefrom.
term “Contemplated Proceedings”
refers to contemplated or pending proceedings relating to the
rights of Lufthansa arising out of any parts or foreign
counterparts of European Patent No. EP 881145 that have been
or are being considered for filing in Germany, France, Spain,
the United Kingdom and/or Japan other than the German
term “Action” refers to
Lufthansa’s § 1782 Petition to this Court (Case
term “Confidential Information”
refers to information produced by Panasonic and designated by
either Panasonic or AES as “ATTORNEYS EYES ONLY”
under the terms of this Protective Order.
term “Privileged Information”
refers to information protected by the attorney-client
privilege, the work product doctrine, or any other applicable
privilege or immunity.
of Designating Confidential Information
Designation of Confidential Information should be made by
stamping, placing, or affixing on the document in a manner
which will not interfere with its legibility the phrase
“ATTORNEY’S EYES ONLY.”
Information should only be designated as Confidential
Information when either Panasonic or AES in good faith
believes that the information contains trade secrets or
nonpublic technical, ...