Pinchback

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9 || DEREK MATTHEWS Case No.: 2:22-cv-01329 DJC CSK P Plaintiff, ) ORDER AND STIPULATED ) PROTECTIVE ORDER vs. 12 || A. TOUT, B. SYSOMBATH, and DOE )

DEFENDANTS 1- )

) Defendants. □ The Court has reviewed the parties’ stipulated protective order below (ECF No. 91), an 16 || finds it comports with the relevant authorities and the Court’s Local Rule. See L.R. 141.1. 17 || Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court APPROVES the protective order (EC 91), subject to the following clarification. The Court’s Local Rules indicate that once an action is closed, it “will not retain jurisdiction over enforcement of the terms of any protective order filed in that action.” L.R. 2] 141.1(f); see Bylin Heating Sys., Inc. v. Thermal Techs., Inc., 2012 WL 13237584, at *2 (E.D. 22 II Cal. Oct. 29, 2012) (noting that courts in the district generally do not…