From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MEDTRONIC, INC. v. AGA MEDICAL CORPORATION

United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Feb 17, 2009
Case No.: 3:07-cv-00567-MMC (EMC) (N.D. Cal. Feb. 17, 2009)

Summary

finding late amendment would cause prejudice, because it would require the preparation of "a defense to a counterclaim with a factual basis distinct from that of underlying claims and whose inclusion in the action would substantially expand the issues for trial"

Summary of this case from Misle v. Schnitzer Steel Indus., Inc.

Opinion

Case No.: 3:07-cv-00567-MMC (EMC).

February 17, 2009

STEVEN D. HEMMINGER (Bar No. 110665), ALSTON BIRD LLP, Two Palo Alto Square, Palo Alto, CA.

MICHAEL S. CONNOR ( pro hac vice), LANCE A. LAWSON ( pro hac vice), BRIAN F. McMAHON (Bar No. 235373), ALSTON BIRD LLP, Charlotte, NC.

MARISSA R. DUCCA ( pro hac vice), ALSTON BIRD LLP, Washington, DC, Attorneys for Defendant, AGA MEDICAL CORPORATION.


[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING AGA'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS ISO REPLY FOR MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ITS ANSWER UNDER SEAL


The Court has received Defendant AGA Medical Corporation's Administrative Motion to File Papers in Support of Its Reply ISO Its Motion for Leave to Amend Its Answer Under Seal, filed February 6, 2009. Good cause appearing, the motion is GRANTED.

It is hereby ORDERED that the following documents be filed under seal:

• The unredacted version of in support of AGA's Reply in support of its Motion for Leave to Amend Its Answer and Counterclaims ("Reply");
• Exhibit A to the Declaration of Steven D. Hemminger in Support of AGA's Reply in Support of Its Motion for Leave to Its Amend ("Hemminger Decl."), which contains excerpts from the Deposition of David Adams of December 9, 2008, which Plaintiffs designated as "Highly Confidential" pursuant to the protective order in this case;
• Exhibit D to the Hemminger Decl., which contains excerpts from the Deposition of Jonathan C. Morris of November 25, 2008, which Plaintiffs designated as "Highly Confidential" pursuant to the protective order in this case;
• Exhibit E to the Hemminger Decl., which is the Expert Report of Dr. Thomas Duerig Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2)(B), served on Medtronic on January 23, 2009, which Defendant designated as "Highly Confidential" pursuant to the protective order in this case.
• Exhibit G to the Hemminger Decl., which is the Expert Report of Dr. Kaushik Bhattacharya Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2)(B), served on Medtronic on January 23, 2009, which Defendant designated as "Highly Confidential" pursuant to the protective order in this case.
• Exhibit H to the Hemminger Decl., which is Medtronic's Index of Privileged Documents of November 19, 2008, which Plaintiffs designated as "Confidential" pursuant to the protective order in this case;
• Exhibit J to the Hemminger Decl., which contains excerpts from the Deposition of David Adams of February 3, 2009, which Plaintiffs designated as "Highly Confidential" pursuant to the protective order in this case;
• Exhibit K to the Hemminger Decl., which Plaintiffs produced documents M-AGA 243004, which Medtronic designated as "Confidential" pursuant to the protective order in this case; and
• Exhibit L to the Hemminger Decl., which is the Expert Report of Dr. Valentina Imbeni Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2)(B), served on Medtronic on January 23, 2009, which Defendant designated as "Highly Confidential" pursuant to the protective order in this case.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-listed documents shall be filed under seal.


Summaries of

MEDTRONIC, INC. v. AGA MEDICAL CORPORATION

United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Feb 17, 2009
Case No.: 3:07-cv-00567-MMC (EMC) (N.D. Cal. Feb. 17, 2009)

finding late amendment would cause prejudice, because it would require the preparation of "a defense to a counterclaim with a factual basis distinct from that of underlying claims and whose inclusion in the action would substantially expand the issues for trial"

Summary of this case from Misle v. Schnitzer Steel Indus., Inc.
Case details for

MEDTRONIC, INC. v. AGA MEDICAL CORPORATION

Case Details

Full title:MEDTRONIC, INC., a Minnesota corporation, MEDTRONIC USA INC., a Minnesota…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division

Date published: Feb 17, 2009

Citations

Case No.: 3:07-cv-00567-MMC (EMC) (N.D. Cal. Feb. 17, 2009)

Citing Cases

Misle v. Schnitzer Steel Indus., Inc.

In that case, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision to deny the plaintiff's request for…

Danmark v. Coolit Sys.

Moreover, even if Asetek is prejudiced, the prejudice would arguably be de minimis. Cf. Medtronic, …