Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-05429/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-05429-29/pdf.json

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

---

U

nite

d

State

s

District C

o

u

rt

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GENENTECH, INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

INSMED INCORPORATION, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C-04-5429 CW (EMC)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME FOR

COMPLIANCE WITH OR TO STAY

MAGISTRATE’S ORDER

(Docket No. 556)

Defendants have filed a motion to enlarge time for compliance with or to stay this Court’s

order which granted in part Plaintiffs’ motion on scope and willfulness discovery. Defendants ask

that the Court either enlarge time for compliance or stay its order “until 5 days after the District

Court’s ruling on [Defendants’] objection or a deemed denial of the objection.” Mot. at 3. 

Defendants indicate that they intend to file objections on August 16, 2006.

Plaintiffs state that they do not oppose a “brief stay relating to the limited issue of waiver

scope, so long as it would allow sufficient time for the parties to (1) complete the willfulness phase

of disclosures and discovery and (2) prepare pre-trial motions/submissions by September 27, 2006.” 

Opp’n at 1. Plaintiffs ask that Defendants “be ordered to (a) complete production of all documents

by August 21, other than production of the contested material, and schedule depositions for no later

than September 1 and (b) reimburse Plaintiffs for all travel costs and related costs that will be

reincurred by the need to re-open depositions.” Id.

Having considered the parties’ briefs and accompanying submissions, the Court hereby

GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants’ motion. Defendants’ concern is documents

Case 4:04-cv-05429-CW Document 559 Filed 08/16/06 Page 1 of 2
U

nite

d

State

s

District C

o

u

rt

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

2

and/or testimony related to trial counsel’s advice and work product. The Court orders that

Defendants produce all documents as ordered except for those related to trial counsel’s advice and

work product by August 21, 2006. Those documents in dispute shall be produced no later than

September 1, 2006. Depositions shall take place within 10 days thereafter. This schedule will allow

Plaintiffs sufficient time to prepare their pretrial submissions. It shall also afford Defendants the

opportunity to raise objections with Judge Wilken and if necessary to seek a further stay from Judge

Wilken. Any further enlargement of time could jeopardize pretrial deadlines and should be decided

by Judge Wilken. The Court shall not order Defendants to compensate Plaintiffs’ for the cost of

depositions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 16, 2006

 

 EDWARD M. CHEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:04-cv-05429-CW Document 559 Filed 08/16/06 Page 2 of 2