Lenox MacLaren Surgical Corporation v. Medtronic, Inc. et al

Filing 356

MINUTE ORDER granting in part and denying in part 291 Motion to Compel. Both Plaintiff Lenox MacLaren Surgical Corporations Motion to StrikeDefendants Second Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses toPlaintiffs Complaint 296 and Defendants Moti on for Leave to AmendAnswer 324 are SUBMITTED and TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT. Defendants Motion to Compel Production of Documents 291 is GRANTEDIN PART. Plaintiffs shall produce documents related to Request forProduction of Documents No. 53 including what the court defines as assets nolater than June 30, 2015. The court DENIES IN PART Defendants requestto compel further responses to Requests for Production Nos. 68 and 69. By Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang on 6-29-15. (nywlc2.)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO MAGISTRATE JUDGE NINA Y. WANG Civil Action: Courtroom Deputy: 10-cv-02139-MSK-NYW Brandy Simmons Date: June 24, 2015 FTR: NYW COURTROOM C-205 Parties Counsel LENOX MACLAREN SURGICAL CORPORATION, George Stephen Long Nicole A. Westbrook Plaintiff, v MEDTRONIC, INCORPORATED, MEDTRONIC SOFAMOR DANEK INCORPORATED, MEDTRONIC PS MEDICAL, INCORPORATED, MEDTRONIC SOFAMOR DANEK CO., LTD., Michael Simons Defendants. COURTROOM MINUTES/MINUTE ORDER MOTION HEARING Court in Session: 3:28 p.m. Appearance of counsel. Discussion and argument held on Plaintiff Lenox MacLaren Surgical Corporation’s Motion to Strike Defendants’ “Second Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff’s Complaint” [296] filed on May 5, 2015, and Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Amend Answer [324] filed on May 26, 2015. ORDERED: Both Plaintiff Lenox MacLaren Surgical Corporation’s Motion to Strike Defendants’ “Second Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff’s Complaint” [296] and Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Amend Answer [324] are SUBMITTED and TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT. Discussion and argument held on Defendants’ Motion to Compel Production of Documents [291] filed on May 4, 2015. Plaintiff’s’ counsel represents on the record that it has not sold or otherwise assigned any claims or rights of recovery arising from this litigation, and no responsive documents exist. ORDERED: Defendants’ Motion to Compel Production of Documents [291] is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiffs shall produce documents related to Request for Production of Documents No. 53 including what the court defines as assets no later than June 30, 2015. The court DENIES IN PART Defendants’ request to compel further responses to Requests for Production Nos. 68 and 69. Parties advise the court of one remaining deposition which will likely occur after the discovery cut-off, by agreement of the parties. The court advises that any such agreement must be accomplished through a formal motion to the court. Court in Recess: 4:07 p.m. Hearing concluded. Total time in Court: 00:39 * To obtain a transcript of this proceeding, please contact Avery Woods Reporting at (303) 825-6119.

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?