arrow left
arrow right
  • *MF* Frias -v- Himnel USA Incorporated et al Print Wrongful Termination Unlimited  document preview
  • *MF* Frias -v- Himnel USA Incorporated et al Print Wrongful Termination Unlimited  document preview
  • *MF* Frias -v- Himnel USA Incorporated et al Print Wrongful Termination Unlimited  document preview
  • *MF* Frias -v- Himnel USA Incorporated et al Print Wrongful Termination Unlimited  document preview
						
                                

Preview

ELECTRONICALLY FILED SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT 11/21/2023 3:32 P'V' Douglas M. Wade, SBN 183107 I. Jason Hill, SEN 179630 By: Abrianna Rodriguez, DEPUTY Dusty M. Knapp, SBN 349307 CALIFORNIA BUSINESS LAWYER 8: CORPORATE LAWYER, INC. 500 N. State College Blvd, Suite 1100 Orange, California 92868 Telephone: (800) 484-4610 Fax: (714) 400-9033 OOQONUI-RUJN Email: doug@ca—businesslawyer.com; jhill@ca-businesslawyer.com dknapp@ca-businesslawyer.com Attorneys for: Defendant Himnel USA Incorporated SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA KO FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO YESENIA ROBLES, Case N0. CIVSBZ314929 11 Plaintiff, UNLIMITED JURISDICTION 12 Assigned for all purposes to the 13 VS- Hon. Khymberli S. Apaloo 14 - HIMNEL USA INCORPORATED, a DEPt- 525 SBJC 15 California Corporation, HIMNEL USA INCORPORATED DBA ST. MARY’S DEFENDANT HIMNEL USA 16 MONTESSORI SCHOOL, a California INCORPORATED’S NOTICE OF Corporation, and DOES 1-20, Inclusive MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE 17 ORDER RE DISCOVERY OF THIRD- 18 PARTY ASSETS AND DEfendantS- Vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv CONFIDENTIAL, PROPRIETARY 19 INFORMATION [C.C.P. § 2031.060] 20 [FILED CONCURRENTLY WITH 21 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND 22 AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT; DECLARATION OF DUSTY M. 23 KNAPP, ESQJ 24 Date: January 17, 2024 Time: 8:30 a.m. 25 Dept. 525 — SBJC 26 Action Filed: July 5, 2023 27 Trial Date: Not Yet Assigned 28 1 NOTICE OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER DEF. HIMNEL’S HIMNEL USA INCORPORATED ADV. YESENIA ROBLES; CASE NO. CIVSBZSI4929 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on January 17, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. in Department SZS-SBJC before the Honorable Khymberli S. Apaloo, at the above-entitled court located at 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, California 92415, Defendant Himnel USA OOQONUI-RUJN Incorporated dba St. Mary’s Montessori School (Hereinafter “Defendant”, “Himnel”, or ”Montessori School”) will and hereby does move the Court for a protective order related t0 documents, records and Video recordings which infringe upon privacy rights of the Plaintiff, the Defendant and its employee and other third party witness without their KO authorization and consent. This motion for Protective Order is brought pursuant t0 C.C.P. § 2031.060. 11 Specifically, Himnel USA Incorporated will ask the Court that private information be 12 barred from production 0n the grounds that the privacy interests 0f some third parties 13 outweigh the relevance of its production, that items that are produced be protected from 14 disclosure to the public pursuant to C.C.P. 2031.060(b)(5) and subject to the [Proposed] 15 Superior Court approved standard Protective and Confidentiality provisions. 16 Specifically, Defendant moves on the grounds that Plaintiff requests personnel 17 files 0f third parties, names and contact information 0f all parents and guardians of 18 children enrolled in Defendant’s school, job descriptions for all Defendant’s employees, 19 Defendant’s private financial information, and surveillance Video footage including the 20 ascertainable identities 0f uninterested third parties. The information demanded by 21 Plaintiff is private, proprietary, and confidential information. 22 Good cause exists for the issuance 0f the requested relief due t0 the nature 0f the 23 information sought, and because Defendant has agreed to produce some of the 24 information subject t0 a protective order. However, after considerable meet and confer, 25 Plaintiff has refused t0 stipulate t0 any protective order, and has not proposed a less 26 restrictive alternative than the standard order issued by complex litigation departments 27 in most California Superior Courts. Further, Plaintiff will suffer n0 undue prejudice as 28 there is no trial date, no pending depositions, and the information requested is not 2 NOTICE OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER DEF. HIMNEL’S HIMNEL USA INCORPORATED ADV. YESENIA ROBLES; CASE NO. CIVSBZSI4929