Tristrata Technology, Inc. v. Neoteric Cosmetics, Inc.
District Court, D. Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FARNAN, Chief Judge.
Presently before the Court is a discovery dispute in this patent infringement action filed by Tristrata Technology Inc. (“Tristra-ta”) against Neoteric Cosmetics, Inc., Murad Skin Research Laboratories, Inc., Howard Murad, M.D, Chanel, Inc., Clarins USA, Inc., Cosmair, Inc., Beiersdorf, Inc., and Leiner Health Products, Inc. (collectively “Defendants”) (D.I.143). For the reasons set forth below, the Court will grant Defendants’ discovery request.
BACKGROUND
In their First Request for the Production of Documents and Things, Defendants requested Tristrata to “produce…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Scovill Manufacturing Co. v. Sunbeam Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1973
- Central Sprinkler Co. v. Grinnell Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1995
- Cordis Corp. v. SciMed Life Systems, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1997
- Bott v. Four Star Corp.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1987
3Cited by3 opinions
- Caliper Technologies Corp. v. Molecular Devices Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 2003
- ICU Medical, Inc. v. B.Braun Medical, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2002
- NimbeLink Corp. v. Digi International Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2024