Magistrate lifts stay of source code production while objections are pending
Leader Technologies Inc. v. Facebook Inc., Civ. No. 08-862-JJF-LPS, September 4, 2009.
Stark, M.J. Plaintiff’s request to modify the scheduling order is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant’s request to compel a supplemental response to interrogatory is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff’s request to continue the stay the court’s prior discovery ruling requiring production of source code is denied notwithstanding pending objections to that order before the trial judge.
The Magistrate considers several discovery issues. Plaintiff’s request to permit fact depositions prior to the completion of fact discovery is denied based on the current scheduling order which requires paper discovery to be completed first. However, a deadline is set for completion of the depositions. Defendant’s interrogatory requests the patentee to disclose all of its products that practice any claim of the patent-in suit. The interrogatory is relevant to Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief, but overbroad. Plaintiff is directed to respond more narrowly by disclosing its products or services that practice any of the asserted claims of the patent-in-suit and to identify, product-by-product and service-by-service, which of the asserted claims are practiced by each of these products or services. Finally, Defendant’s request to stay an order requiring production of source code pending a ruling on its objections is denied. The parties are further reminded that at the time they contact the court to schedule a teleconference to resolve a discovery dispute, there should be no ambiguity between the parties as to what the dispute is and as to the precise relief sought.
