Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD et al

Filing 606

STIPULATION Regarding Motion To Seal Confidential Documents Relating To The Parties Oppositions And Replies To Summary Judgment by F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD, Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Hoffmann LaRoche Inc.. (Toms, Keith)

Download PDF
Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-LaRoche LTD et al Doc. 606 Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 606 Filed 06/29/2007 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ____________________________________ AMGEN INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ) F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD, ) ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS GmbH, ) and HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE INC., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ____________________________________) CIVIL ACTION No.: 05-cv-12237WGY STIPULATION REGARDING MOTION TO SEAL CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE PARTIES OPPOSITIONS AND REPLIES TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff Amgen Inc. ("Amgen") and Defendants F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Roche Diagnostics GmbH, and Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. (collectively "Roche") (collectively, "the parties") stipulate and agree that: 1. Both Amgen and Roche will have until July 12 to file motions to seal documents submitted to the Court for in camera review by either party on June 29, 2007, in connection with the parties' oppositions to the pending motions for summary judgment. 2. Amgen will have until July 12 to file motions to seal Amgen confidential documents submitted to the Court for in camera review on July 9, 2007, in connection with Amgen's summary judgment replies. 3. Roche will have until July 12 to file motions to seal Amgen confidential documents submitted to the Court for in camera review on July 9, 2007, in connection with Roche's summary judgment replies. Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 606 Filed 06/29/2007 Page 2 of 4 Dated: June 29, 2007 Boston, Massachusetts Respectfully submitted, PLAINTIFF AMGEN INC. By its Attorneys, Of Counsel: Stuart L. Watt Wendy A. Whiteford Monique L. Cordray Darrell G. Dotson Kimberlin L. Morley Erica Olson AMGEN INC. One Amgen Center Drive Thousand Oaks, CA 91320-1789 Telephone: (805) 447-5000 /s/ Patricia R. Rich D. Dennis Allegretti (BBO# 545511) Michael R. Gottfried (BBO# 542156) Patricia R. Rich (BBO #640578) DUANE MORRIS LLP 470 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 500 Boston, MA 02210 Telephone: (617) 289-9200 Facsimile: (617) 289-9201 Lloyd R. Day, Jr. (pro hac vice) DAY CASEBEER MADRID & BATCHELDER LLP 20300 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Suite 400 Cupertino, CA 95014 Telephone: (408) 873-0110 Facsimile: (408) 873-0220 William G. Gaede III (pro hac vice) McDERMOTT WILL & EMERY 3150 Porter Drive Palo Alto, CA 94304 Telephone: (650) 813-5000 Facsimile: (650) 813-5100 Kevin M. Flowers (pro hac vice) MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP 233 South Wacker Drive 6300 Sears Tower Chicago IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 474-6300 Facsimile: (312) 474-0448 2 Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 606 Filed 06/29/2007 Page 3 of 4 DEFENDANTS F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD, ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS GMBH, and HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE INC. By their Attorneys, /s/ Keith E. Toms Lee Carl Bromberg (BBO# 058480) Julia Huston (BBO# 562160) Keith E. Toms (BBO# 663369) Nicole A. Rizzo (BBO# 663853) BROMBERG & SUNSTEIN LLP 125 Summer Street Boston, MA 02110 Tel. (617) 443-9292 ktoms@bromsun.com Leora Ben-Ami (pro hac vice) Mark S. Popofsky (pro hac vice) Patricia A. Carson (pro hac vice) Thomas F. Fleming (pro hac vice) Howard S. Suh (pro hac vice) Peter Fratangelo (BBO# 639775) KAYE SCHOLER LLP 425 Park Avenue New York, New York 10022 Tel. (212) 836-8000 3 Case 1:05-cv-12237-WGY Document 606 Filed 06/29/2007 Page 4 of 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that this document filed through the ECF system will be sent electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as non registered participants on the above date. /s/ Keith E. Toms Keith E. Toms 03099/00501 696414.1 4

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?