From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gen-Probe Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
May 31, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00770-RBJ-BNB (D. Colo. May. 31, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-cv-00770-RBJ-BNB

05-31-2012

GEN-PROBE INCORPORATED, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, v. BECTON, DICKINSON AND COMPANY, a New Jersey corporation, Defendants.


ORDER

This matter arises on Becton, Dickinson and Company's Motion Emergency Motion to Compel Mark Toukan's Compliance With April 12, 2012 Order [Doc. # 31, filed 5/24/2012] (the "Motion to Compel). I held a hearing on the Motion to Compel this afternoon and made rulings on the record, which are incorporated here.

A tangential issue was raised during the hearing concerning the documents which must be produced pursuant to the command of the Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects [Doc. # 3-2] (the "Subpoena"). In particular, some of the responsive documents or information are alleged by Gen-Probe to be immune from disclosure pursuant to the attorney-client privilege (the "Disputed Materials"). That issue was presented to me previously. In an Order [Doc. # 27] entered on April 12, 2012, I adopted and followed the order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California (the "California Court"), which held that the Disputed Materials were privileged, and I refused to order the production of the Disputed Materials. See Order [Doc. # 27] at p. 2. I am now informed that the California Court has modified that ruling and has required Gen-Probe to produce the Disputed Materials, and that Gen-Probe has disclosed to BD the Disputed Materials.

On the strength of the most recent order of the California Court, as described to me by the parties, I will require Mr. Toukan to produce all documents responsive to the command of the Subpoena. In the event Mr. Toukan produces any documents which Gen-Probe believes are subject to the attorney-client privilege (and about which the California Court has made no ruling), Gen-Probe may seek relief pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5)(B).

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Compel [Doc. # 31] is GRANTED as follows:

(1) Mr. Toukan shall, on or before June 29, 2012, at 9:00 a.m., comply with the command of the Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects [Doc. # 3-2];

(2) Mr. Toukan shall appear for and give his deposition on June 29, 2012, at 9:00 a.m., pursuant to a subpoena which shall be served on him in full compliance with the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(b) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 45.1; and

(3) The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order on Mark Toukan by United States mail, first class postage prepaid, at his address of record.

BY THE COURT:

Boyd N. Boland

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Gen-Probe Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
May 31, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00770-RBJ-BNB (D. Colo. May. 31, 2012)
Case details for

Gen-Probe Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co.

Case Details

Full title:GEN-PROBE INCORPORATED, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, v. BECTON…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: May 31, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 12-cv-00770-RBJ-BNB (D. Colo. May. 31, 2012)