Berall v. Verathon Inc. et al
Filing
162
ORDER granting 156 Letter Motion for Local Rule 37.2 Conference. The parties shall appear for a telephonic conference on June 11 at 10:00 a.m. The dial-is is (888) 363-4734, access code: 4645450. SO ORDERED. Telephone Conference set for 6/11/2020 at 10:00 AM before Judge Loretta A. Preska. (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 6/8/2020) (va)
Case 1:10-cv-05777-LAP-DCF Document 156 Filed 05/22/20 Page 1 of 3
601 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10022
United States
Ashley Ross
To Call Writer Directly:
+1 212 446 4954
ashley.ross@kirkland.com
www.kirkland.com
22, 2020
Filed via ECF
THE HONORABLE LORETTA A. PRESKA
United States District Judge
Southern District of New York
United States Courthouse, Courtroom 12A
500 Pearl Street
New York, NY 10007-1312
Re:
Facsimile:
+1 212 446 4900
+1 212 446 4800
The parties shall appear for a
telephonic conference on June 11 at
10:00 a.m. The dial-in is (888)
363-4734, access code: 4645450.
SO ORDERED.
June 8, 2020
________________________
LORETTA A. PRESKA, USDJ
Letter-Motion for
Pre-Motion Discovery Conference
Local Civil Rule 37.2
Berall v. Verathon, Inc. et al., C.A. No. 1:10-cv-05777-LAP-DCF
Dear Judge Preska:
Pursuant to Your Honor’s Individual Practices and April 30, 2020 Order (D.I. 156), we
write on behalf of Dr. Jonathan Berall to request a Pre-Motion Discovery Conference in the abovenamed patent case regarding certain mediation-related disputes. In accordance with your Order,
we have met and conferred with counsel for each Defendant, and, as to the Verathon Inc.
(“Verathon”) dispute outlined below, sought assistance of the mediator regarding disclosures we
believe are necessary for a fruitful mediation. We have been unable to come to a meeting of the
minds on two issues, and request an informal conference with the Court.
First, LMA North America, Inc. (“LMA”) has sought disclosure of the settlement
agreements between Dr. Berall and certain former Defendants in this matter. At least one
agreement contains confidentiality provisions requiring Dr. Berall to obtain permission from the
other party to the agreement before disclosure. That party has requested that prior to disclosure,
we obtain a Protective Order in order to ensure confidentiality of the terms of that agreement. Dr.
Berall does not oppose this request, and believes that entry of a Protective Order will facilitate
mediation discovery while preserving the legitimate business interests of the parties and other
persons. Dr. Berall sent each Defendant a draft Protective Order. Their responses and positions
(as Dr. Berall currently understands them) are as follows:
•
•
Beijing
Boston
LMA has agreed to entry of a Stipulated Protective Order limited to mediation.
Verathon initially indicated agreement on entry of a Stipulated Protective Order, but
later rescinded their agreement and now refuses such entry.
Chicago
Dallas
Hong Kong
Houston
London
Los Angeles
Munich
Palo Alto
Paris
San Francisco
Shanghai
Washington, D.C.
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?