BAJALIA et al v. GIANTEX INC. et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
VALDOSTA DIVISION
NICK M BAJALIA and 	:
MONIQUE BAJALIA, 	:
:
Plaintiffs, 	:
:
v. 	: 	CASE NO.: 7:24-CV-134 (LAG)
:
GIANTEX INC., et al., 	:
:
Defendants. 	:
:
ORDER
Before the Court is the Parties’ Consent Motion for Protective Order. (Doc. 23).
Therein, the Parties ask the Court to enter a protective order to protect Plaintiff’s
confidential medical information and records. (See id. at 2–3). Under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 26(c), the Court may enter a protective order upon finding good cause.
Stipulated protective orders have become “commonplace in the federal courts” to allow the
parties “to designate particular documents as confidential . . . and postpone[] the necessary
‘good cause’ required for entry of a protective order until the confidential designation is
challenged.” Chicago Trib. Co. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1307 (11th
Cir. 2001) (citing In re Alexander Grant & Co. Litig., 820 F.2d 352, 356 (11th Cir. 1987)).
Accordingly, the Court finds a protective order is warranted to facilitate discovery. The
Parties’ Joint Motion (Doc. 23) is GRANTED, and the Parties’ proposed Consent
Protective Order (Doc. 23) is hereby ADOPTED and made the ORDER of the Court.
SO ORDERED, this 21st day of January, 2026.
/s/ Leslie A. Gardner
LESLIE A. GARDNER, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case 7:24-cv-00134-LAG-ALS Document 24 Filed 01/21/26 Page 1 of 1