Ashker

] 3 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ° MICHAEL ASHKER, Case No. 2:24-cv-03297-DC-CSK " Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MODIFIED STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER (ECF No .20)

FORTRESS NORTH AMERICA,

13 |} L.L.C., et al., Defendants. 15 The Court has reviewed the parties’ stipulated protective order below (ECF No. 17 || 20), and finds it comports with the relevant authorities and the Court’s Local Rule. See 18 || L.R. 141.1. The Court APPROVES the protective order, subject to the following 19 || clarification. The Court’s Local Rules indicate that once an action is closed, it “will not retain 21 || jurisdiction over enforcement of the terms of any protective order filed in that action.” L.R. 22 || 141.1(f); see Bylin Heating Sys., Inc. v. Thermal Techs., Inc., 2012 WL 13237584, at *2 23 || (E.D. Cal. Oct. 29, 2012) (noting that courts in the district generally do not retain 24 || jurisdiction for disputes concerning…