Legal Opinion
In Re Rivastigmine Patent Litigation (MDL NO. 1661)
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided April 6, 2007No. 05 MD 1661(HB)(JCF)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
FRANCIS, United States Magistrate Judge.
A dispute has arisen in this patent case over the obligation of a party under Rule 612 of the Federal Rules of Evidence to disclose privileged documents that have been reviewed by a deposition witness. Dr. Wanda Williams was designated to testify on behalf of defendants Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Watson Laboratories, Inc. (collectively, “Watson”) pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Dr. Williams had previously been employed by Watson as Executive Director of Portfolio and Project Management.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Berkey Photo, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1977
- Ehrlich v. HoweDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1994
- S & A Painting Co. v. O.W.B. Corp.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1984
- Suss v. MSX International Engineering Services, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2002
3Cited by3 opinions
- BARHAM v. ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES LTD.District Court, S.D. Florida · 2022
- Luke v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 2022
- Walsh v. Versa Cret Contracting Company Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2023