Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-02133/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-02133-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Patent Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MEMC ELECTRONIC MATERIALS,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

MITSUBISHI MATERIALS, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

____________________________________/

AND RELATED CASE

SUMITOMO MITSUBISHI,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

MEMC ELECTRONIC MATERIALS,

Defendant(s).

___________________________________/

No. C-01-04925 SBA (JCS) And

Related Case No. C05-2133 SBA (JCS)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER

RESPONSES TO JUDGE SPERO’S

ORDER [Docket No. 475] AND

GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION

TESTIMONY [Docket No. 531]

On October 14, 2005, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel Further Responses to Judge Spero’s

Order dated January 12, 2004, and to Request for Production No. 139 (the “Motion to Compel”). 

On November 9, 2005, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel Deposition Testimony (the “Motion for

Deposition”).

On November 18, 2005, a hearing was held on the Motion to Compel and the Motion for

Deposition. Robert Evans and Marc W. Vander Tuig appeared for Plaintiff. Glenn E. Forbis and Edward

V. Anderson appeared for Defendants.

For reasons stated on the record, and good cause shown,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Motion to Compel is DENIED.

Case 4:05-cv-02133-SBA Document 108 Filed 11/23/05 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Motion for Deposition is GRANTED in part. 

Lead trial counsel for Plaintiff, and lead trial counsel for Defendant, were ordered to meet-and-confer

immediately after Court to prepare a list of agreed upon 30(b)(6) witnesses to be deposed on subjects 7,

12 and 13 of MEMC’s Notice of Deposition, and file it with the Court on Monday, November 21, 2005.

 Unless the parties reach a different agreement, the witnesses shall be produced in the United States for

deposition before December 31, 2005. The parties shall split the expenses incurred in transporting the

witnesses to the United States including air fare (not to exceed Business Class rates), hotel

accommodations and meals. The remainder of the Motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 23, 2005

_____________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:05-cv-02133-SBA Document 108 Filed 11/23/05 Page 2 of 2