### NUM BER13-06- 0003 6-CV 

## COURT OF A PP EA LS T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS CORPUS CHRI ST I -

## E DI NBURG

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ IN RE: GUI DA NT CORPORA TION, GUIDA NT SA LES CORPORATION, G U I D AN T P U E R T O R I C O S AL E S C O R P O RAT I O N &C AR D I AC

PA C EMA K ER S, IN C .

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ On Petit ion fo r Writ of M an da mus

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 

## ME MOR A N D U M OP I N I ON Be fo re C hie f J us tice Vald ez an d Ju stice s R od rigu ez an d Garza

M emo rand um Opin ion Pe r Cu riam T his ma nda mu s procee ding conce rns an agreed conf iden tiality orde r entere d in Dec ember

2005 that g ov er ned t he hand li ng of dis cov er y mater ial s i n the under ly ing proceed ing

. On Janua ry 13, 2006, the tr ial cour t str uck the sti pul ated protec ti v e order and th e ag re ement t o c omply w it h the order

. On J anuar y 19, 2006, re lat ors, Gui dant Cor por ati on, G uid ant S ale s Cor porati on, and GuidantPuerto R ic o Sal es Cor por ati on and Cardia c P acemak ers, Inc ., filed a pe ti ti on for w ri t of mandamus and a moti on for emerg ency temporar

y re li ef c hal len g ing the tr ial cour t' s Janua ry 13 order

. In a per cu ri am2

order , on Janua ry

19, 2006, thi s Cour

t g ra nted the req uest ed emerg ency r eli ef, sta y ed th e tr ial court 's Januar

y 13 order , and req uest ed a re spons e f ro m the real par ti es in int er est , Loui s E . M otal and Beatr ic e O. H ino jos a. Betw een J anuar

y 24, 2006 an d M ar ch 6, 200 8, t he par ti es filed tw enty -o ne j oin t moti ons to s tay

the proceed ing pendi ng the par ti es' efforts to mutual ly

r esol v e the i ss ues ra is ed i n rel ators' petiti on for w ri t of m andamus. In each motion , rel ators and real par ti es in int er estas ked thi s C our t t o pos tpone our

r eq uestfor a r espon se a n d t o r efrai n from
cons ide ri ng the meri ts of this mandamus ac ti on unt il the date spec ified in the moti on. They did no t ask us to ot herwi se mo dif y our Janu ary19 orde r. In each m otion , the parties also infor med the Cou rtthatthey hav e ent er ed i nto a n a gre e m e n t to at tempt to resol v e the is sue o f confident ial it y protec ti ons for di sc ov er y mater ial s i n the under ly ing proce edin g—the sam e issues raised in relators' petitio n for w rit of man dam us. On Se ptember

2, 2008, re lat ors fil ed th eir tw enty -s econd j oin t moti on to st ay the proce edin g asking this Court to again po stpo ne o ur request for a respo n se an d to again sta y our co nsi derati on of the peti ti on for w ri t of manda mus thi s ti me unti l Ma rc h 9, 2009. Af ter mo re than tw o and one -half y ears during w hich time this case has beco me long ov erdue , w e de cline to do so. W e recogniz e and comm end the ef forts of the pa rties to w ork tow ard a re sol uti on of t his matter

. At the s ame ti me, bas ed on thos e efforts, w e c oncl ude that the fili ng of t he mandamus is pr emature. Therefor e, w e di smi ss r ela tors' peti ti on for
w ri t of mandamus as premature, w it hout pr eju dic e to any par ti es' r ig hts and w it hout p r ej u d i c e t o re fi l i n g a p e t i t i o n u t i l i z i n g re c o rd s p r e p a r e d i n t h i s ca u s e . A d d i t i o n a l l y , w e l i ft the s tay i mposed on J anuar

y 19, 2006, and, based on t he numerous ag re ed moti ons filed3

in thi s matter , pres ume that the parti es w il l re ach an agreement that the tri al cour t w il l g ra nt bel ow . See T EX . R. A PP . P. 52. 8(a). Mo re ov er , rela tors' tw enty -s econd j oin t moti on to st ay the proceed ing is deni ed as moot. P E RC U R I A M Me moran dum Opi nio n del iv er ed and filed thi s 1 5th d ay

of September , 200 8.