UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

________________

BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY and ) 

GFA BRANDS, INC., ) 

) Nos. 1:12-cv-01508 

Plaintiffs, ) 1:12-cv-01509 

 v. ) 1:12-cv-01510 

) 1:12-cv-01511 

KEEBLER CO.; ) 1:12-cv-01512 

FAMOUS AMOS CHOCOLATE CHIP ) 1:12-cv-01513 

COOKIE COMPANY, LLC; ) 

MURRAY BISCUIT CO. LLC; ) 

VOORTMAN COOKIES LTD.; ) Judge Richard A. Posner. 

BREMNER FOOD GROUP, INC.; ) 

COOKIE SPECIALTIES INC.; ) 

TOPCO ASSOCIATES LLC; ) 

THE PILLSBURY COMPANY, LLC; ) 

UNILEVER UNITED STATES, INC.; ) 

CONOPCO, INC.; and ) 

NESTLÉ USA, INC., ) 

 ) 

Defendants. ) 

 ) 

 

ORDER OF OCTOBER 31, 2012 

 Pursuant to my order of October 18 [dkt. 369], Bremner has produced a document 

listing the ingredients and production processes of its accused products over time, but it 

did so only on October 28. That was well after October 23 and 24, the deposition dates 

for Bremner’s Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses, who were unprepared to testify regarding their 

designated topics; the Topco witness deposed on October 23 was similarly unprepared. 

Bremner and Topco are hereby ordered to pay the expenses, costs, and fees associated 

with Brandeis’s motion to compel production of marketing and contract documents 

[dkt. 353] and with the three Rule 30(b)(6) depositions I have mentioned. 

 Brandeis claims that the documents that Bremner produced do not describe how 

the ingredients of the accused products are handled before and during mixing. Brandeis 

Case: 1:12-cv-01508 Document #: 377 Filed: 10/31/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:12633
does not specify all of the manufacturing details it seeks, and the relevance of this 

information to its infringement and damages arguments is unclear. I shall therefore 

grant it relief only to the extent specified in its declaration [dkt. 374]. By Friday, 

November 2, Bremner shall (by deposition transcript, affidavit, or other documentation) 

disclose for each accused product the tolerances and quality controls that apply to its 

ingredients; the temperatures at which ingredients are stored, mixed, and baked; 

whether any ingredients are pre-mixed or votated (which I understand to mean mixed 

while cooling); and whether any of these procedures have changed over the accused 

period. On or before Wednesday, November 7, I will entertain a motion by Brandeis to 

file a supplemental expert report one week later (on November 14) to address these 

additional facts. 

 Brandeis argues that it has been prejudiced by Topco’s failure to have produced 

supplier agreements before the depositions, but Topco’s vendor specifications, 

produced before the depositions, appear to provide the information Brandeis seeks. 

Brandeis also complains that there are discrepancies in the documents that describe 

production processes over time for each accused Bremner or Topco product. Whether 

the documents that have been produced (or any particular data entries) accurately 

reflect the process in use at a particular time is a question for the jury. 

 

 United States Circuit Judge 

October 31, 2012 

Case: 1:12-cv-01508 Document #: 377 Filed: 10/31/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:12634