In re: Application of Medical Research Council for Order

Filing 24

ORDER Regarding Discovery Dispute. Signed by Judge Sallie Kim on December 16, 2015. (sklc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/16/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 8 9 IN RE: APPLICATION OF MEDICAL RESEARCH COUNSIL FOR AN ORDER PERMITTING ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENAS TO TAKE DISCOVERY FOR USE IN FOREIGN PROCEEDING, Petitioner. Case No. 15-mc-80213-SK ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY DISPUTE 10 Regarding Docket No. 23 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 On December 15, 2015, after close of business, Medical Research Council (“MRC”) filed a 13 unilateral letter brief in violation of this Court’s Standing Order. The Court’s Standing Order 14 requires that the parties meet and confer before seeking relief on a discovery dispute. If the parties 15 are unable to meet and confer or the moving party is unable to obtain the opposition party’s 16 portion of the joint letter, the Standing Order sets forth specific procedures with which the moving 17 party must comply. MRC did not submit a joint letter brief, did not explain whether it meet and 18 conferred with Genentech, Inc, and did not comply with the procedures for submitting a unilateral 19 letter brief. Moreover, MRC contends that it needs Genentech to provide satisfactory discovery 20 responses by December 18, 2015, but fails to explain why it waited until 8:24 p.m. on December 21 15, 2015 to file its letter brief. MRC is admonished that any future failure to comply with this 22 Court’s Standing Order will be sanctioned. 23 24 25 26 27 28 The Court HEREBY ORDERS Genentech to file a responsive letter brief today, December 16, 2015, by no later than 8:30 p.m. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 16, 2015 ______________________________________ SALLIE KIM United States Magistrate Judge

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?