Legal Opinion
Amgen Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided January 18, 2000No. CIV.A. 97-10814-WGYPublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
YOUNG, Chief Judge.
Amgen Inc. (“Amgen”) is embroiled in complex patent litigation with Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc. (“Hoechst”) and Transka-ryotic Therapies, Inc. (“Transkaryotie”). Sweeping discovery requests have been met by equally adroit countermoves. Discovery motions fall as the gentle rain. Amidst this preliminary grappling, counsel for Hoechst has made the misstep feared by all litigators, inadvertently producing to Amgen 3,821 privileged documents from the files of Hoechst attorney Maynard R. Johnston, Esq. Hoechst, not surprisingly, wants its privileged documents…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- United States v. United Shoe MacHinery CorporationDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1950
- Texaco Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Department of Consumer AffairsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
- In Re Sealed CaseCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Boyd v. Comdata Network, Inc.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 2002
- In re Grand Jury SubpoenaDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2004
- State ex. rel. Flowers v. Tennessee Trucking Ass'n Self Insurance Group TrustCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2006
- Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2001
- Ken's Foods, Inc. v. Ken's Steak House, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2002
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.