Trujillo v. Apple Computer, Inc. et al

Filing 876

EXHIBIT 10

CHICAGO 3500 Three First National Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60602.4283 Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

ROSS E. KIMBAROVSKY Direct Dial: 312.977.4446 Facsimile: 312.977.9206 [e-mail]

WASHINGTON 1500 K Street, N. W., Suite 250 Washington, D.C. 20005.1714 Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http://www.uhlaw.com

March 3, 2006 By E-mail J. Scott McBride., Esq. Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP 54 West Hubbard Street Chicago, Illinois 60610 Re: Dear Scott: This responds to your February 21, 2006 letter, concerning the production by Mayo of Mayo clinical trial records related to the Q-Ray® Ionized Bracelet®. We commend your agreement to produce the study records with fewer redactions than Mayo made in its prior production in the Casey v. QT and FTC v. QT matters and we thank you for forwarding a sample document showing the specific redactions you propose. However, we do not believe that any redactions are necessary. HIPAA specifically provides for a qualified protective order that permits controlled disclosure of medical information. We would be happy to forward appropriate language for your review. Furthermore, we do not believe that redactions are merited or reasonable. The data you propose to redact, such as for example, the identity of Mayo employees who participated in the studies and identity of witnesses to the Informed Consent forms, goes to the very heart of the allegations against Defendants. Redaction of such data would unfairly prejudice Plaintiff. We note one other concern with your letter. As you know, Mayo performed two studies, prematurely terminating the first study. We expect to receive (and will request) all hard copy and electronic study records related to both studies. Please call me at your convenience on March 6 so that we can further discuss this issue in advance of the March 7 status hearing with Judge Moran. Sincerely, QT v. Mayo/Mayo Study Documents Discovery

Ross E. Kimbarovsky

EXHIBIT 11

BARTLIT BECK HERMAN PALENCHAR & SCOTT LLP
www.bartlit-beck.com

CHICAGO OFFICE COURTHOUSE PLACE 54 WEST HUBBARD STREET CHICAGO, IL 60610 TELEPHONE: [phone] FACSIMILE: [phone] DENVER OFFICE 1899 WYNKOOP STREET 8TH FLOOR DENVER, CO 80202 TELEPHONE: [phone] FACSIMILE: [phone] WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL: [phone] [e-mail]

March 6, 2006 BY FAX & EMAIL Ross E. Kimbarovsky Ungaretti & Harris LLP 3500 Three First National Plaza Chicago, IL 60602 Fax: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Re: Dear Ross: QT v Mayo

In our conversation today, I told you that on the issue of a non-party patients' right to privacy, Florida's more stringent privacy laws control over HIPPA. You asked to see some authority. Please see HIPPA at 45 CFR § 160.203(b) and the following representative cases: In re Fink, 876 F.2d 84 (11th Cir. 1989) Amente v. Newman, 653 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 1995) Haywood v. Samai, 624 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. Dist. App. Ct. 1993) Age Inst. of Fla., Inc. v. McGriff, 884 So. 2d 512 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004) If you have contrary authority, please disclose it without delay. Very truly yours,

J. Scott McBride

EXHIBIT 12

EXHIBIT 13

EXHIBIT 14