Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corporation

Filing 173

Order by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu denying 171 Discovery Letter Brief without prejudice. (dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/17/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
SYNOPSYS INC,

12
13

Plaintiff(s),
v.

14

MENTOR GRAPHICS CORP,

15

No. C-12-06467 DMR
ORDER DENYING JOINT DISCOVERY
LETTER [DOCKET NO. 171] WITHOUT
PREJUDICE AND REQUIRING THE
PARTIES TO FURTHER MEET AND
CONFER

Defendant(s).
___________________________________/

16
17

Before the court is a joint discovery letter filed under seal by Plaintiff and Defendant.

18

[Docket Nos. 170, 171.] In the joint letter, Defendant seeks to compel Plaintiff to provide

19

supplemental responses to some of Defendant’s interrogatories. In Plaintiff’s portion of the joint

20

letter, Plaintiff indicates that the parties have not met and conferred on all of the discovery disputes,

21

as required by this court’s standing order. For example, shortly before the parties filed the joint

22

letter, Plaintiff provided supplemental responses to some of the interrogatories at issue. Plaintiff

23

avers that after it provided supplemental responses to Interrogatory Nos. 20 and 28, Defendant

24

changed its position in the joint discovery letter and described disputes relating to topics about

25

which the parties had not met and conferred.

26

Accordingly, the court denies the letter without prejudice and orders the parties to meet

27

and confer regarding the issues described in the joint letter. If the parties are unable to resolve their

28

disputes without judicial intervention, they shall file a joint discovery letter of no more than 10

1

pages by 3 p.m. on June 24, 2014. The parties shall also file an exhibit including only those

2

interrogatories noted in the joint letter, as well as any responses, supplemental responses, and

3

objections; the exhibit may also include any relevant interrogatories (and responses and objections)

4

served in the Oregon action.

S

11
For the Northern District of California

R NIA

United States Magistrate Judge

ER

H

United States District Court

RT

10

. Ryu

onna M
Jud M.D
DONNAge RYU

NO

9

Dated: June 17, 2014

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

A

8

FO

7

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

LI

IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNIT
ED

6

RT
U
O

5

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C