In re Human Tissue Products Liability Litigation
District Court, D. New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
*154 OPINION
MARK FALK, United States Magistrate Judge.
This matter comes before the Court by way of Plaintiffs’ motion to compel the production of certain privileged documents. The Court has considered the submissions made in support of and in opposition to the instant motion. No oral argument was heard. Fed.R.Civ.P. 78. Based on the reasons that follow, Plaintiffs’ motion is granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
This action arises from a criminal enterprise by Biomedical Tissue Services, Ltd. (“BTS”) and its principal Michael Mastro-marino (“Mastromarino”) to harvest tissue from human…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Van Dusen v. BarrackSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- United States v. NoblesSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Clark v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- United States v. Paul A. BilzerianCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Phillips v. C.R. Bard, Inc.District Court, D. Nevada · 2013
- McCullough v. Fraternal Order of PoliceDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2014
- Idenix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Gilead Sciences, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2016
- Selby v. O'DeaAppellate Court of Illinois · 2020
- Seyler v. T-SYSTEMS NORTH AMERICA, INC.District Court, S.D. New York · 2011
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.