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)
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?