Lufthansa Technik v. Panasonic Avionics Corporation

Filing 175

MINUTE ORDER: This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. The parties are ORDERED to submit a joint status report no later than 30 days from today. To the extent Lufthansa seeks to continue to keep this case open, other than for the limit ed purpose of enforcing the Second Amended Protective Order entered in this matter, it should provide (1) updated status information for each foreign proceeding, (2) details regarding the remaining items at issue with respect to its January 2019 su bpoena to AES, and, finally, (3) how those items are relevant and necessary with respect to each of the foreign proceedings. AES, in turn, should provide a response to Lufthansa's position with respect to each. Authorized by U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour. (SR)

Case 2:17-cv-01453-JCC Document 175 Filed 05/05/22 Page 1 of 2

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9
10
11
12

In the Matter of the Application of
CASE NO. C17-1453-JCC
LUFTHANSA TECHNIK AG, Petitioner, for an
Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1782 to Take
MINUTE ORDER
Discovery, Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, of Respondent Panasonic Avionics
Corporation for Use in Foreign Proceedings

13
14
15
16
17

The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C.
Coughenour, United States District Judge:
This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. In September 2017, Lufthansa Technick

18

AG filed a petition with this Court seeking discovery from Panasonic Avionics Corporation to

19

support foreign patent enforcement proceedings against Intervenor Astronics Advanced

20

Electronic Systems Corp. (“AES”). (Dkt. No. 1.) The Court granted the petition in part in

21

December 2017. (Dkt. No. 39; see Dkt. No. 46-1 at 1–6 (resulting subpoena).) Lufthansa later

22

moved to take discovery from AES as well (Dkt. No. 54), which the Court granted in January

23

2019. (Dkt. No. 80; see Dkt. No. 81-1 at 17–23 (resulting subpoena).)

24

Since then, the parties have engaged in substantial motion practice regarding the resulting

25

subpoenas. (See, e.g., Dkt. Nos. 81, 88, 103, 120, 132.) More recently, Lufthansa agreed to

26

terminate that portion of its petition seeking discovery from Panasonic, except for the limited
MINUTE ORDER
C17-1453-JCC
PAGE - 1

Case 2:17-cv-01453-JCC Document 175 Filed 05/05/22 Page 2 of 2

1

purpose of enforcing the Second Amended Protective Order entered in this matter. (See Dkt. No.

2

151 at 1–2.) Thus, as far as the Court is aware, all that remains on Lufthansa’s 2017 petition is

3

AES’s compliance with the January 2019 subpoena. Consistent with this, in December 2021, the

4

Court ordered AES to give a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition regarding some of the information AES.

5

(Dkt. No. 172 at 2.) The Court has received no update from the parties regarding the status of

6

this matter since then.

7

Accordingly, the parties are ORDERED to submit a joint status report no later than 30

8

days from today. To the extent Lufthansa seeks to continue to keep this case open, other than for

9

the limited purpose of enforcing the Second Amended Protective Order entered in this matter, it

10

should provide (1) updated status information for each foreign proceeding, (2) details regarding

11

the remaining items at issue with respect to its January 2019 subpoena to AES, and, finally, (3)

12

how those items are relevant and necessary with respect to each of the foreign proceedings. AES,

13

in turn, should provide a response to Lufthansa’s position with respect to each.

14
15

DATED this 5th day of May 2022.

16

Ravi Subramanian
Clerk of Court

17

s/Sandra Rawski
Deputy Clerk

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
MINUTE ORDER
C17-1453-JCC
PAGE - 2