Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-05793/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-05793-14/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud

---

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 

Case No. 07-05793 (JW) – STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY 1

HOWARD HOLDERNESS (SBN 169814) 

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 

One Market, Spear Street Tower 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Telephone: 415.442.1000 

Facsimile: 415.442.1001 

E-mail: hholderness@morganlewis.com 

KRISTOFOR T. HENNING (PAB 85047) 

(Pro Hac Vice application forthcoming) 

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 

1701 Market Street 

Philadelphia, PA 19103 

Telephone: 215.963.5000 

Facsimile: 215.963.5001 

E-mail: khenning@morganlewis.com 

Attorneys for Defendant 

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 

MICHAEL F. RAM (SBN 104805) 

RAM & OLSON LLP 

 555 Montgomery Street, Suite 820 

 San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: 415.433.4949 

Facsimile: 415.433.7311 

E-mail: mram@ramolson.com

MARC H. EDELSON 

(Pro Hac Vice) 

EDELSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC 

45 W. Court Street 

Doylestown, PA 18901 

Telephone: 215.230.8043 

Facsimile: 215.230.8735 

E-mail: medelson@edelson-law.com 

JEFFREY L. KODROFF 

JOHN A. MACORETTA 

(Pro Hac Vice) 

SPECTOR, ROSEMAN, KODROFF, & 

WILLIS, P.C. 

1818 Market Street, Suite 2500 

Philadelphia, PA 19103 

Telephone: 215.496.0300 

Facsimile: 215.496.6611 

E-mail: jkodroff@srkw-law.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

NATHAN NYGREN, STEPHEN 

SHIFFLETTE and AMY FROMKIN, on 

behalf of themselves and all others 

similarly situated, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, a 

Delaware corporation, 

 Defendant. 

Case No. 07-05793 (JW) 

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING 

EXPERT DISCOVERY 

Action filed: November 14, 2007 

Trial: October 5, 2010 

Case 5:07-cv-05793-JW Document 104 Filed 02/08/10 Page 1 of 5
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 

Case No. 07-05793 (JW) – STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY 2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the following Stipulation and Order (“Order”) shall 

govern expert discovery in this litigation: 

 1. In order to avoid consuming the parties’ and the Court’s time and resources on 

potential discovery issues relating to experts, the parties have agreed to certain limitations on the 

scope of expert-related discovery. Neither the terms of the Order nor the parties’ agreement to 

them implies that any of the information restricted from discovery in this Order would otherwise 

be discoverable. This Stipulation and Order represents the entire agreement between the parties 

relating to expert discovery and all prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, 

representations, and statements, whether oral or written by a party or such party’s legal counsel, 

are merged herein. 

 2. Without expanding the scope of otherwise discoverable information, the following 

categories of documents, data and information need not be disclosed by any party and are outside 

the scope of permissible expert discovery for any time during the pendency of the abovecaptioned litigation, including any time prior to the entry of this Order: 

(a) any written or oral communications (including notes, emails and/or 

memoranda memorializing the same) between or among: (1) expert witnesses and counsel 

relating to the testimony of the expert and/or the drafting and/or preparation of any reports, except 

as provided in ¶ 4; and/or (2) expert witnesses and their respective staffs relating to the testimony 

of the expert and/or the drafting and/or preparation of any reports, except as provided in ¶ 4; and 

(b) any notes, draft reports, draft studies, draft work papers or other 

preliminary calculations, computations, data runs or work prepared by, for, or at the direction of 

an expert witness 

Case 5:07-cv-05793-JW Document 104 Filed 02/08/10 Page 2 of 5
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 

Case No. 07-05793 (JW) – STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY 3

 3. As a result of this Order, the parties and the experts do not have any obligation to 

retain any of the materials identified in paragraph 2. 

 4. The protections against discovery contained in paragraph 2 above will not apply to 

any communications, documents, data, statistical analyses, notes, computations, data runs, tests or 

work or other information upon which an expert witness relies for any of his or her opinion(s) in 

this matter. Data, statistical analyses, or other information (including any calculation or exhibit) 

upon which an expert relies for any of his or her opinion(s) in this matter shall be produced or, if 

already produced, identified to the other party. Notwithstanding the other provisions of this 

Order, in the event an expert performs any physical tests on any computer or wireless device in 

connection with his or her retention in this case, then all such physical tests performed or referred 

to by that expert, and the results thereof, shall be subject to requests for discovery by an adverse 

party, provided that nothing within this paragraph shall prohibit or prejudice any party from 

asserting any appropriate objections to discovery and/or the admissibility of such physical tests 

and/or the results thereof. 

 5. Nothing in this stipulation shall be construed to prevent deposition questions 

relating to the substance of the testifying expert’s opinions (including alternative theories, 

methodologies, variables, or assumptions that the expert may or may not have considered in 

formulating his or her opinions or in preparing his or her report), the process by which those 

opinions and/or the experts report were developed; or to any communications (including 

communications from counsel), documents, data, statistical analyses, or other information upon 

which an expert witness relies for any of his or her opinion(s) in this matter. 

 6. Nothing in this stipulation shall be construed to preclude reasonable questions at 

deposition concerning the expert’s compensation, hours expended in preparing his or her report 

and testimony, and frequency and duration of meetings with counsel regarding his or her report. 

Case 5:07-cv-05793-JW Document 104 Filed 02/08/10 Page 3 of 5
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 

Case No. 07-05793 (JW) – STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY 4

 7. Each expert submitting a report shall list all matters in which the expert testified in 

any deposition, trial, or hearing, or submitted a report, in the last five years. The disclosure shall 

identify the case caption, the court in which it was pending, and the party that retained the expert. 

 8. No subpoenas (for depositions or documents) need be served on any testifying 

expert from whom a report or declaration is provided. Instead, the party retaining such expert 

will make the expert available for deposition at a time mutually agreed to by the parties and 

consistent with the Court’s scheduling orders. In the event a responding party fails to so 

cooperate in good faith, the party seeking discovery may serve any appropriate subpoenas and 

this Order will not be used as the basis for an objection to such subpoenas. 

 9. Notwithstanding the other provisions of this Order, all documents specifically 

referred to and/or relied upon by an expert in rendering any opinions in this case and/or in any 

expert report, declaration, affidavit or other such document submitted in this case shall be 

identified in such expert submission and produced upon request by an adverse party. 

 10. The parties agree to comply with this Order pending the Court’s approval and 

entry of this Order.

 11. A copy of the signed Order shall be served upon all counsel of record within seven 

(7) days of its entry. 

Dated: February 8, 2010 By: /s/ Kristofor T. Henning 

 Kristofor T. Henning 

 (Pro Hac Vice application forthcoming) 

 MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 

 1701 Market Street 

 Philadelphia, PA 19103 

 Telephone: 215.963.5000 

 Facsimile: 215.963.5001 

 E-mail: khenning@morganlewis.com 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 

Case 5:07-cv-05793-JW Document 104 Filed 02/08/10 Page 4 of 5
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 

Case No. 07-05793 (JW) – STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY 5

Dated: February 8, 2010 By: Michael F. Ram 

 Michael F. Ram (SBN 104805) 

 RAM & OLSON LLP 

 555 Montgomery Street, Suite 820 

 San Francisco, CA 94111 

 Telephone: 415.433.4949 

 Facsimile: 415.433.7311 

 E-mail: mram@ramolson.com

 Jeffrey L. Kodroff 

 John A. Macoretta 

 (Pro Hac Vice) 

 SPECTOR, ROSEMAN, KODROFF, 

 & WILLIS, P.C. 

 1818 Market Street, Suite 2500 

 Philadelphia, PA 19103 

 Telephone: 215.496.0300 

 Facsimile: 215.496.6611 

 E-mail: jkodroff@srkw-law.com

 Marc H. Edelson 

 (Pro Hac Vice) 

 EDELSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC 

 45 W. Court Street 

 Doylestown, PA 18901 

 Telephone: 215.230.8043 

 Facsimile: 215.230.8735 

 E-mail: medelson@edelson-law.com 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

 

 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February____, 2010 ____________________________________ 

 The Honorable James Ware 

 United States District Judge 

Howard R. Lloyd Magistrate Judge

Case 5:07-cv-05793-JW Document 104 Filed 02/08/10 Page 5 of 5