In recent years, jurisdictions like Washington and California have required or encouraged line-by-line confidentiality designations. Under the Western District of Washington Local Rule 26(c)(2), for example, parties may file protective orders to protect confidential information only if "its protection from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles …" Furthermore, parties are encouraged to use the district's model protective order, which requires parties to clearly identify the "portion(s)" of a document that are confidential in their productions. Model Stipulated Protective Order, W.D. Wa. Similarly, the Northern, Southern, and Central districts of California encourage parties to use model protective orders that explicitly prohibit mass confidentiality designations and require parties to designate "only those parts of material, documents, items" that qualify for protection, and thereby prohibiting "mass, indiscriminate, or routinized designations." See, e.g., Model Protective Order, N.D. Cal. Because some courts require parties seeking to deviate from the model order to show good cause, parties may be reluctant to negotiate less narrow confidentiality restrictions.