Opinion
1:19-cv-748
06-17-2022
CLIFFORD A. LOWE, et al., Plaintiff, v. SHIELDMARK, INC., et al., Defendants.
OPINION & ORDER [Related Doc. 115]
JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:
“To sustain a protective order under Rule 26(c), the moving party must show ‘good cause' for protection from one (or more) harms identified in Rule 26(c)(1)(A) ‘with a particular and specific demonstration of fact, as distinguished from stereotyped and conclusory statements.'”
In re Ohio Execution Protocol Litig., 845 F.3d 231, 236 (6th Cir. 2016) (quoting Serrano v. Cintas Corp., 699 F.3d 884, 901 (6th Cir. 2012)); see also Procter & Gamble Co. v. Bankers Tr. Co., 78 F.3d 219, 227 (6th Cir. 1996) (rejecting joint protective order).
In this case, the parties jointly requested that the Court approve a Stipulated Protective Order, but did not provide the Court with the grounds supporting that request.
Accordingly, the Court DENIES the protective order without prejudice. The parties may refile the order with the appropriate motion discussing the Rule 26(c) standard.
IT IS SO ORDERED