Legal Opinion
Saxholm AS v. Dynal, Inc.
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided February 2, 1996No. CV-94-2409 (ARR)PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM ORDER
POHORELSKY, United States Magistrate Judge:
Background
The plaintiffs in this patent infringement action (eoheetively “Saxholm”) have asserted the attorney-client privilege with respect to more than 2,000 documents identified on their log of privileged documents prepared pursuant to the Standing Orders of this court governing discovery (the “privilege log”). Many of the documents come from the files of the original patent holder, who is deceased, and relate to his patent prosecutions in five countries over the last twenty years or more. The assertion of the privilege is further…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Sperry v. Florida Ex Rel. Florida BarSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated September 15, 1983 Marc Rich & Co. A.G., Intervenor-Appellant v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
- Duplan Corporation v. Deering Milliken, Inc.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1974
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- A. Farber & Partners Inc. v. GarberDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2006
- Navigant Consulting, Inc. v. WilkinsonDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2004
- Aktiebolag v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2002
- Madanes v. MadanesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- In re Rivastigmine Patent LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.