Warner Chilcott Company LLC v. Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. et al

Filing 171

MEMORANDUM regarding the status report submitted at D.I. 169 (see Memorandum for further details). Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 11/1/2013. (nms)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
WARNER CHILCOTT COMPANY, LLC,
Plaintiff,

v.

Civil Action No. 11-11 05-RGA

ZYDUS PHARMACEUTICALS
(USA) INC., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM

Time being of the essence, I have separately entered an order on the issues raised in the
parties' status report. (D.I. 169). I write this simply to explain why I have rejected Defendants'
requests.
Defendants ask for brand plans. When they asked Plaintiff for these documents, they
justified the request by reference to two paragraphs of, and an exhibit to, Dr. Sninsky's expert
report. (D.I. 169, exh. A, 10/25/13 letter). Plaintiff promptly withdrew the two paragraphs and
the exhibit. (D.I. 169, exh. B, 10/28/13 letter). Defendants now assert that the brand plans are
relevant to two different paragraphs and a different exhibit to Dr. Sninsky's report. In my
opinion, this is switching horses in midstream. It's too late to do so.
Defendants ask for the details of the financial relationships between Plaintiff and about
twenty-three doctors. One is Dr. Sninsky, whose compensation for serving as an expert in this
case is presumably already disclosed. Dr. Sninsky and the others have, it appears, all served as
consultants [or been paid to conduct trials or research] for either Plaintiff or its predecessor in
ownership ofthe patent. Bias is always relevant, but whether a doctor was paid $100,000 or

$200,000 is of such little marginal probative value that it does not constitute good cause, or
anything close to it, for reopening discovery on this topic at this late date.
One unrelated issue that seems worth flagging at this time is the trial schedule. The
parties submitted a request for a 5-day bench trial, starting at 9:30a.m. each day. There was no
comment about this at the Rule 16 conference. As I have gained more experience with the
conduct of ANDA trials, my preferences have changed. My preference would be to have a 3-day
bench trial, starting at 8:30a.m. each day (in other words, each side gets 10 Yz hours). I mention
this now so that the parties can plan accordingly.

It-t-\'3
Date

~~.~
United States

Istnct Judge