Karl Storz Endoscopy-America, Inc. v. Stryker Corporation et al

Filing 330

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley denying 322 KSEA's Motion to Compel Interrogatory Responses and For Sanctions. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/13/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

KARL STORZ ENDOSCOPY-AMERICA,
INC.,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Plaintiff,
v.
STRYKER CORPORATION, et al.,

Case No.14-cv-00876-RS (JSC)
ORDER RE: KSEA’S MOTION TO
COMPEL INTERROGATORY
RESPONSES AND FOR SANCTIONS
Re: Dkt. No. 322

Defendants.

12
13

KSEA moves to compel Stryker to respond further to interrogatory nos. 5 and 6 and also

14

moves for sanctions. After reviewing the parties’ submissions, including the excerpts of the

15

deposition of Mr. Robinson, KSEA’s motion is DENIED. First, Mr. Robinson had relevant

16

information which is demonstrated by the answers given at the day-long deposition; it was not a

17

waste of KSEA’s time. Second, If KSEA wanted specific answers to each question asked it

18

should have served a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notice. Stryker then would have been obligated to

19

prepare witnesses to answer questions about previously identified topics. That was not done here.

20

As an aside, the Court notes that Stryker’s counsel complained on the deposition record

21

that KSEA’s counsel was asking “bad questions all day.” If Stryker’s counsel had a concern that

22

the witness could not understand the questions, the proper response is to raise that concern in a

23

polite, professional way. To retort that counsel has been asking “bad questions all day” is neither.

24

Finally, the motion to seal Exhibit G is DENIED. Stryker seeks to seal information that is

25

not remotely sealable under Civil Local Rule 79-5(b). For example, the publicly-known features

26

of a product are not sealable. That someone has been at every sale meeting is not confidential.

27

Stryker has not shown why identifying its legacy product is a trade secret. The testimony

28

regarding whether the deponent was the most knowledgeable is not sealable and, more

1
2

importantly, was publicly discussed by Stryker in its letter brief. And so on.
This Order disposes of Docket Nos. 322, 323, 324.

3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 13, 2017

6
7
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY
United States Magistrate Judge

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2