Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-02848/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-02848-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:2201 Declaratory Judgement

---

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

INTEL CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

TELA INNOVATIONS, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 3:18-cv-02848-WHO 

ORDER ON DISCOVERY DISPUTE 

CONCERNING TELA’S MOTION TO 

COMPEL DEPOSITION

Re: Dkt. No. 202

On February 19, 2020, I ordered Intel to provide an answer to Tela’s Interrogatory Number 

27 into how Intel selected the patents for its declaratory judgment complaint. I did so after 

determining that Tela had a compelling need for such information in order to make out a prima 

facie case for breach of the parties’ mutual nondisclosure agreement. Dkt. No. 199. I further 

ordered Intel to “produce a witness who [could] testify about this topic.” 

According to the parties’ joint discovery dispute letter of March 24, 2020, Intel produced 

Keith Gray, who was not involved in the patent selection process but who has been educated on 

the contents of Intel’s interrogatory response. Tela argues that testimony from Gray is not 

sufficient and instead seeks to depose a witness with firsthand knowledge, specifically Mashhood 

Rassam. Intel counters that Gray’s knowledge is adequate, that Tela’s request is untimely, and 

that Tela is attempting to re-litigate the issues I resolved last month. 

I agree with Tela. It appears that Intel has at best avoided discovery on this topic and at 

worst obfuscated. Tela is entitled to depose a percipient witness with knowledge on this issue.

1

 

Intel shall produce Rassam for deposition as soon as it can be safely and responsibly conducted 

 

1 The deposition of Rassam is enough; I will not allow depositions of the “unidentified Kirkland & 

Ellis personnel” Tela references. 

Case 3:18-cv-02848-WHO Document 204 Filed 03/26/20 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

given the current shelter-in-place order and consistent with the parties’ March 16, 2020 

stipulation. See Dkt. No. 201. I also grant Tela’s request to supplement its expert reports within 7 

days of the deposition, limited to the information addressed therein. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 25, 2020

William H. Orrick

United States District Judge

Case 3:18-cv-02848-WHO Document 204 Filed 03/26/20 Page 2 of 2