United States of America v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al

Filing 234

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered. 220 Defendants' Motion to Strike Certain Allegation in Relators' Second Amended Complaint is DENIED. Fact discovery to be completed by 6/30/2018. Joint Statement to be filed by 12/8/2017. (Montes, Mariliz)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
__________________________________________
)
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and
)
THE STATE OF NEW YORK ex rel .
)
DR. ANTONI NARGOL and
)
DR. DAVID LANGTON
)
)
Plaintiffs-Relators,
)
)
v.
)
Civil Action No. 12-10896-LTS
)
DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS, INC., DEPUY, INC., )
and JOHNSON & JOHNSON SERVICES, INC., )
)
Defendants.
)
)
ORDER
November 20, 2017
SOROKIN, D.J.
Defendants’ Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 220) is DENIED. The Circuit Court’s decision
(Doc. No. 204), rather than Plaintiffs’ counsel’s interpretation of it as expressed in the factual
allegations in the Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 219), defines the scope of the claims remaining
in this case and the criteria the Court will consider in evaluating any discovery disputes that arise
between the parties in the course of this case.
As stated in Court at the Rule 16 conference on November 17, 2017, the parties shall
submit a proposed protective order by December 8, 2017. They may submit either an agreedupon order or a single order reflecting agreed-upon as well as disputed provisions (identifying in
different colors, or another easily understandable method, the parties’ respective proposals) and a
joint statement containing an explanation of each party’s positions. The Court will review the

proposal and promptly issue a ruling. Initial disclosures will occur on the January 8, 2018 date
proposed by the parties in their joint submission on scheduling (Doc. No. 227).
The proposed discovery period suggested by the parties, with fact discovery running until
May 31, 2019, is too long as a general matter and even more so here in the absence of any
specified discovery. Accordingly, the Court establishes June 30, 2018 as the deadline for fact
discovery. The parties may propose joint or separate subsidiary fact discovery deadlines in a
supplemental joint statement to be filed by December 8, 2017. The supplemental joint statement
may address the parties’ positions on, and the basis for, exceeding the discovery limitations
established by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The Court will hold a status conference at the conclusion of fact discovery and such
further status conferences during the course of fact discovery as suggested by the parties or
initiated by the Court. A period of expert discovery will follow fact discovery.
If Defendants are of the view that discovery should proceed first only as to matters
relating to their public disclosure bar argument, they may file a motion for phased discovery, not
to exceed five pages, identifying the factual basis supporting the conclusion that a strong
dispositive motion based on the public disclosure bar may follow a period of phased discovery.
A response to this motion for phased discovery, if filed, or a similar motion related to a further
Rule 12(b)(6) motion as discussed at the Rule 16 Conference is due seven days after the filing by
Defendants. Each response is also limited to five pages. Counsel shall meaningfully confer in
advance of the filing of either of these motions just as they shall in advance of filing any motion.
SO ORDERED.

/s/ Leo T. Sorokin
Leo T. Sorokin
United States District Judge
2