Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01572/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01572-4/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

1 06cv1572

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JENS ERIK SORENSEN, as trustee of

SORENSEN RESEARCH AND

DEVELOPMENT TRUST,

Civil No. 06cv1572-BTM (CAB)

Plaintiff, ORDER FOLLOWING 5-7-07

DISCOVERY CONFERENCE

v.

THE BLACK & DECKER CORPORATION, a

Maryland corporation,

Defendant.

On May 7, 2007, the Court held a telephonic conference on the parties’ cross-motions to

compel further discovery responses. Michael Kaler, Esq., and Melody Kramer, Esq., appeared for

Plaintiff Sorensen Research and Development Trust (“Sorensen”). Raymond Niro, Jr., Esq., Dina

Hays, Esq., Greg Casimer, Esq., and Allison Goddard, Esq., appeared for Defendant Black &

Decker (“B&D”). Bob Bender, Esq., appeared for Defendants Phillips Plastics Corp and Hi-Tech

Plastics (“Phillips”). Having considered the submissions of the parties and the arguments of

counsel, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. B&D will supplement its response to Sorensen’s Interrogatory No. 3 regarding

the maintenance of production dates for the accused products, no later than May

14, 2007.

2. Sorensen’s motion to compel further response to Interrogatory No. 5 is

DENIED.

Case 3:06-cv-01572-BTM-CAB Document 120 Filed 05/09/07 Page 1 of 3
 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 06cv1572

3. B&D will supplement its response to Sorensen’s Interrogatory No.13 and

identify those documents supporting the denials of RFA Nos. 42, 43, 51, 53, 54,

55, 57 and 58, by identifying the documents specific to each denied RFA, no

later than May 14, 2007.

4. Based on B&D’s representation that it is withdrawing the reference to the Engel

flood from its response to Interrogatory No. 6, Sorensen’s motion to compel a

further response is DENIED without prejudice.

5. Sorensen’s motion to compel a further response to Interrogatory No. 6 regarding

the identity of the B&D “business manager” is moot, and was withdrawn by

Sorensen.

6. The parties withdrew without prejudice their motions with regard to the

confidentiality designations of portions of the depositions of Mr. Bruner, Mr.

Schiech and Mr. Sorensen in order to continue to meet and confer on these

matters.

7. Sorensen will produce all correspondence and communications with actual or

potential licensees of the ‘184 patent, from 1994 to the present, no later than

May 25, 2007. If the volume of the production is such that it cannot be made in

its entirety by May 25, Sorensen will commence production no later than that

date and provide a schedule for the completion of the production. Any

documents withheld based on privilege will be identified on a privilege log

produced no later than the completion of the production.

8. B&D’s request to reopen the deposition of Ole Sorensen for a second time based

on Plaintiff’s counsel’s obstructive behavior and improper instructions is

DENIED. Although the Court finds that counsel’s behavior was inappropriate,

particularly with regard to instructing the witness not to answer, the transcript

indicates that the witness answered the questions. Counsel for Plaintiff,

however, was admonished that should he instruct any witnesses at future

depositions not to answer questions based on anything other than privilege, he

Case 3:06-cv-01572-BTM-CAB Document 120 Filed 05/09/07 Page 2 of 3
 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

3 06cv1572

will be sanctioned.

9. Sorensen will produce for inspection the non-privileged documents provided to

Ole Sorensen by his counsel Boris Zelkind, identified at the March 7 deposition

of Mr. Sorensen, no later than May 14, 2007. Any documents withheld for

privilege will be identified on a privilege log at the time of production.

10. Sorensen will provide supplemental responses to B&D’s RFA Nos. 141, 168,

195, 222, 249, 276, 303, 330, 357, 384, 441, 438, 466, 495, 523, 551, 579, 607,

635 and 663 and admit or deny whether the reference identified in the request is

prior art to the ‘184 patent no later than May 14, 2007.

11. B&D’s motion to compel further responses to additional Requests for

Admission is taken under submission and the Court will issue a separate order

on this matter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 9, 2007

CATHY ANN BENCIVENGO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-01572-BTM-CAB Document 120 Filed 05/09/07 Page 3 of 3