Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-05702/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-05702-89/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1 Antitrust Litigation

---

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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION, 

d/b/a GLAXOSMITHKLINE, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

ABBOTT LABORATORIES, 

 

 Defendant. 

________________________________/ 

No. C 07-5702 CW 

ORDER MOTIONS IN 

LIMINE 

(Docket Nos. 650 

and 656) 

 As discussed at the final pre-trial conference, held on April 

8, 2015, the Court rules on the parties' motions in limine as 

follows: 

GSK's Motions in Limine 

1. Preclude Abbott from Introducing Evidence of Kolassa's 

"Reasonable Market Behavior" or "Reasonable Pricing" Analysis 

 DENIED. Kolassa may testify to this analysis, but counsel 

 and Kolassa shall limit their use of the word "reasonable" 

 and Kolassa shall explain what he means by the word 

 "reasonable" during direct examination. 

2. Preclude Abbott from Introducing Evidence re Kolassa's 

Explanation for GSK's Decision to Diminish Lexiva Marketing 

 DENIED, except that Kolassa may not opine that Lexiva is 

 clinically inferior. 

Case 4:07-cv-05702-CW Document 679 Filed 04/10/15 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court 

For the Northern District of California 

 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 

Abbott's Motions in Limine 

1. Exclude Dr. Prowse's Damages Opinions 

 DENIED. Dr. Prowse may testify to his damages opinions, but 

 he may not refer to conversations he had with employees 

 after submitting his report as support for the opinions in 

 his reports. 

2. Strike Paragraphs 13 and 14 of Dr. Dolan's Supplemental 

Rebuttal Report 

 DENIED. 

3. Bar Dr. Siddiqui From Testifying on the Effect of the Price 

Increase on Lexiva or Prescribing Habits 

 DENIED. Dr. Siddiqui may testify to these subjects as he was 

 permitted to do in the 2011 trial. 

4. Bar GSK from Offering Dr. Prowse's Opinion on Restitutionary 

Damages 

 GRANTED. 

5. Bar GSK from Referring to GSK and Abbott as "Partners" 

 DENIED, but counsel shall limit the use of the word "partner" 

 and clarify the lay meaning of the word "partner" during 

 direct examination. 

6. Bar Parties from Using Antitrust Terminology Such as 

"Monopolist," "Monopoly Power" or "Market Power" 

 DENIED, though the parties shall limit their use of such 

 terms. 

 

 Finally, during the Final Pretrial Conference, counsel for 

Abbott provided the Court with a recently-produced GSK report 

regarding the "Lexiva HC4 Pilot" program. The report may be 

germane to GSK's damages and the report indicates that GSK may 

have undertaken subsequent analysis of the pilot program. Abbott 

asked the Court to reopen discovery. As the Court indicated at 

Case 4:07-cv-05702-CW Document 679 Filed 04/10/15 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court 

For the Northern District of California 

 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 

the hearing, the Court will reopen discovery to permit Abbott to 

request expedited production of documents related to the pilot 

program. 

Dated: 04/10/2015 

CLAUDIA WILKEN 

United States District Judge 

Case 4:07-cv-05702-CW Document 679 Filed 04/10/15 Page 3 of 3