Protective Orders in California Discovery: Must You Hand a Competitor Your Customer List and Pricing?

Last updated: November 2026. Reviewed by Pavel Kolmogorov, California business litigation attorney (State Bar No. 321018).

A protective order under Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.060 is a California court order that limits or conditions discovery to protect a party from unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden and expense. When a competitor demands your customer list and pricing, the court's choices are not limited to yes or no. It can order production on conditions, such as disclosure only to specified persons. The motion requires good cause and must be made promptly. Kolmogorov Law, P.C. represents companies and their owners in business disputes.

Call (909) 235-6116 or contact us online to discuss a discovery demand for confidential business information.

What the statute allows

When documents, things, or electronically stored information have been demanded, the responding party, any other party, or any affected person may promptly move for a protective order. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.060, subd. (a).) For good cause, the court may make any order that justice requires. The statute gives six examples.

1. Some or all of the items need not be produced at all.
2. The time to respond is extended.
3. Production takes place somewhere other than the place named in the demand.
4. Inspection or copying proceeds only on specified terms and conditions.
5. A trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information is not disclosed, or is disclosed only to specified persons or only in a specified way.
6. The items produced are sealed and opened only on order of the court.

(Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.060, subd. (b).)

The same tool for other kinds of discovery

Parallel sections cover interrogatories and depositions, with similar lists. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2025.420, 2030.090.) At a deposition the court may order that certain matters not be inquired into, a point that matters when a company is served with a list of topics. Our page on the person most qualified deposition explains that setting.

Two general limits apply to every method. The court must limit the scope of discovery if its burden, expense, or intrusiveness clearly outweighs the likelihood that it will lead to admissible evidence. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2017.020, subd. (a).) It must also restrict discovery that is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or that can be obtained from a more convenient or less expensive source. The same holds for a method that is unduly burdensome given the needs of the case, the amount in controversy, and the importance of the issues. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2019.030, subd. (a).)

Confidentiality tiers and attorneys' eyes only

The fifth example is the statutory basis for what lawyers call tiered orders. A party may ask that material it marks confidential be used only for the lawsuit. It may ask that its most sensitive material, labeled attorneys' eyes only, go to the other side's lawyers and outside experts and not to its owners or employees. Each restriction needs good cause.

A Court of Appeal upheld an order of the second kind between competing publishers. One side's financial records could be seen only by the other side's attorneys and accountants. A counsel-only order, the court held, is within the trial court's authority on a showing of good cause, even for information that goes to the merits. (GT, Inc. v. Superior Court (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 748.) That decision applied an earlier version of the discovery statutes.

Parties may propose an order of this kind, but the court decides whether good cause supports a restriction.

When the information is a trade secret

The owner of a trade secret has a privilege to refuse to disclose it, if allowing the privilege will not tend to conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice. (Evid. Code, § 1060.) A Court of Appeal set the order of proof. The party claiming the privilege must show the information is a trade secret. The party seeking it must then make a particularized showing that the information is relevant and necessary to a material element of a claim or defense, and essential to a fair resolution. If that showing is made, the court weighs the protection a protective order would give and any less intrusive alternatives. (Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. v. Superior Court (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1384.)

A lawsuit for trade secret misappropriation has rules of its own. They are covered on our pages about protecting trade secrets during litigation and identifying trade secrets before discovery.

Timing, meet and confer, and the cost of losing

The statute says promptly and gives no number of days. Do not let the response date pass while a motion is being considered. A party that fails to serve a timely response to a document demand waives its objections, including privilege and work product, unless the court grants relief. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a).)

The motion must include a meet and confer declaration. It states facts showing a reasonable and good faith attempt, in person, by telephone, or by videoconference, to resolve each issue informally. That wording took effect January 1, 2026. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2016.040, subd. (a).) Our meet and confer guide covers the process.

The court must impose a monetary sanction on a party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes the motion, unless it finds substantial justification or that the sanction would be unjust. If the motion is denied, the court may order the discovery on terms that are just. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.060, subds. (g), (h).) Our page on discovery sanctions explains what follows a disobeyed order.

If your business is the one asking for the documents

The party asking for protection must show good cause. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.060, subd. (b).) Offering a tiered order at the outset can answer a confidentiality objection. It does not replace the showing of need required when the information is a trade secret.

For electronically stored information, a party that claims a source is not reasonably accessible must prove it. Even then the court may order production for good cause and may allocate the expense. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.060, subds. (c), (d), (e).) A counsel-only restriction can be challenged later if your own people are needed to understand the documents.

What to bring to the first meeting

• The document demands, interrogatories, or deposition notice at issue, with the date of service.
• A description of the sensitive categories: pricing, customer lists, source code, formulas, financial statements.
• Who inside the company has access to that information now.
• Any nondisclosure agreements that cover it.
• Any protective order already proposed or entered in the case.

Frequently asked questions

A competitor is suing us and demands our customer list and pricing in discovery. Do we have to hand it over?

Not unconditionally. If the information is relevant, a California court may require production, but Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.060 lets the court set conditions for good cause. The order can restrict a trade secret or other confidential commercial information to specified persons, such as outside counsel and experts. Serve timely objections and move promptly.

What is CCP 2031.060?

It is the California statute on protective orders for document and inspection demands. A responding party or other affected person may promptly move for an order. For good cause the court may excuse production, extend the time to respond, set conditions, limit who sees confidential commercial information, or seal what is produced. The motion requires a meet and confer declaration.

What does attorneys' eyes only mean?

It is a label lawyers use for a restriction in a protective order. Material with that designation goes to the receiving party's lawyers and outside experts, but not to its owners or employees. The basis in California is the court's power, for good cause, to order that confidential commercial information be disclosed only to specified persons or only in a specified way.

How soon must a motion for a protective order be filed?

The California statutes say promptly and give no number of days. The motion should be made before the response or deposition date, because a late response to a document demand waives objections under Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300. The motion must include a declaration showing a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve each issue in person, by telephone, or by videoconference.

We lost a motion for a protective order. Can the court make us pay the other side's attorney fees?

Yes. Under California Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.060, the court must impose a monetary sanction on a party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion for a protective order. The court excuses it on finding that the losing side acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the sanction unjust. A separate subdivision protects a party whose electronic data was lost through routine, good faith system operation.

Talk to a California civil litigation attorney

If a discovery demand reaches your company's confidential information, or an opponent is withholding documents as confidential, call (909) 235-6116 or contact us online. Kolmogorov Law, P.C. is a business litigation firm in Irvine, California.

Related reading: our civil litigation practice and the discovery toolkit.

This page provides general information about California law and is not legal advice. Outcomes depend on the information at issue, the showing made, and the court.