Angioscore, Inc. v. Trireme Medical, Inc. et al

Filing 46

ORDER re #45 Joint Discovery Letter Brief re Motion to Quash the Deposition Subpoena Served by Defendants on Third Party Peter K. Johansson (for deposition on Thursday, November 8, 2012) filed by Eitan Konstantino, Trireme Medical, Inc., Angioscore, Inc.. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 11/6/12. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/6/2012)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 2 3 ANGIOSCORE, INC., 4 5 6 7 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Case No.: 12-CV-3393-YGR ORDER RE: DISCOVERY LETTER BRIEF vs. TRIREME MEDICAL, INC. et al., Defendants/Counterclaimants. 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 The Court has reviewed the parties’ Letter Brief requesting the Court quash a subpoena directed at third party Peter K. Johansson. Mr. Johansson has relevant information and, therefore, taking his deposition is generally 12 acceptable. However, it is not clear that it is necessary to take his deposition in advance of the 13 hearing on the Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions. Briefing on that motion is closed and no additional 14 material may be filed without Court approval; nor may additional evidence be submitted at the 15 hearing on the Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions without Court approval. That said, Defendants may 16 take Mr. Johansson’s deposition subject to the limitations of, inter alia, Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(a). 17 Because Defendants did not comply with Local Rule 30-1 before noticing the deposition, 18 Mr. Johansson does not need to appear at the November 8, 2012 deposition. The parties are 19 ordered to meet and confer about scheduling Mr. Johansson’s deposition, and are ordered to 20 schedule Mr. Johansson’s deposition for a date within 14-days of the date this Order is filed. 21 The Court takes no position on whether any of the information that may be elicited during 22 Mr. Johansson’s deposition is protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or the work product 23 doctrine. Any objection, whether on the basis of privilege, work product, relevance, etc., must be 24 stated on the record. The Court cannot issue an advisory ruling in advance of the deposition. 25 This Order Terminates Docket Number 45. 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 28 Date:November 6, 2012 _______________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 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?