Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00826/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00826-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CODEXIS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

ENZYMEWORKS, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 16-cv-00826-WHO 

ORDER ON DISCOVERY DISPUTES

Re: Dkt. Nos. 52, 54

Defendants’ request for an order compelling plaintiff to “respond fully” to defendants’

interrogatories one through four, Dkt. No. 52, is DENIED as unjustified and premature. See 

Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., No. 14-cv-04741-RS (MEJ), 2016 WL 1039029, at *3-4 (N.D. Cal. 

Mar. 15, 2016); United States v. Bazaarvoice, Inc., No. 13-cv-00133-EMC (LB), 2013 WL 

1739472, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 22, 2013).

Defendants’ request for an order striking (1) all of plaintiff’s amended Identification of 

Trade Secrets, and (2) paragraphs 3 and 5 of plaintiff’s original Identification of Trade Secrets, 

Dkt. No. 54, is also DENIED. Any future amendment of plaintiff’s Identification of Trade Secrets 

will require a showing of good cause. See Perlan Therapeutics, Inc. v. Superior Court, 178 Cal. 

App. 4th 1333, 1350-51 (2009); Loop AI Labs Inc v. Gatti, No. 15-cv-00798-HSG (DMR), 2015 

WL 9269758, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2015).

In the future, lead trial counsel shall certify that they met and conferred concerning any 

discovery dispute that is brought to me. They shall describe their personal efforts to resolve the 

dispute and specify the length of their discussions. I hope that this procedure insures that the only 

Case 3:16-cv-00826-WHO Document 56 Filed 08/11/16 Page 1 of 2
2

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

disputes requiring court intervention from this point forward are ones that trial counsel believe are 

pivotal to the case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 11, 2016

______________________________________

WILLIAM H. ORRICK

United States District Judge

Case 3:16-cv-00826-WHO Document 56 Filed 08/11/16 Page 2 of 2