`Case 1:17-cv-01407-CFC Document 300 Filed 03/13/19 Page 1 of 2 PagelD #: 26319
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`Consol. Civ. No. l7-l407-CFC
`
`GENENTECH, INC. and CITY OF )
`HOPE,
`
`) )
`
`) )
`
`) )
`
`) )
`
`ORDER
`
`Plaintiffs",
`
`V-
`
`AMGEN INC.
`
`Defendant,
`
`Whereas, Plaintiffs have moved the Court to amend the Protective Order (D.I.
`
`209) so that they may use discovery obtained in this litigation to initiate a new patent
`
`infringement action against Defendant based on a supplement
`
`to Defendant’s
`
`Biologics License Application No. 761028 (the “sBLA”) (see D.I. 291);
`
`Whereas, neither party attached the Protective Order to the filings they made
`
`in connection with Plaintiffs’ motion or discussed the language of the Protective
`
`Order during oral argument; and
`
`Whereas, Paragraph 28 of the Protective Order
`
`states: “Confidential
`
`Discovery Material produced by a Party
`
`may be used by a Receiving Party only
`
`for purposes of this Litigation orfitture United States patent infringement litigation
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-01407-CFC Document 300 Filed 03/13/19 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 26320
`Case 1:17-cv-01407-CFC Document 300 Filed 03/13/19 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 26320
`
`between the Parties arisingfiom Defendant isfiling ofBiologz'cs License Application
`
`No. 761028” (D.I. 209 at 1] 28) (emphasis added);
`
`NOW, THEREFORE, at Wilmington this 13th day of March, 2019,
`
`it is
`
`HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall submit on or before March 15, 2019 a
`
`letter, in fourteen-point font and no longer than 400 words, addressing the following
`
`question: In light of the above-quoted language from Paragraph 28 of the Protective
`
`Order, why is it necessary to amend the Protective Order in order for Plaintiffs to be
`
`able to initiate future patent litigation based on Defendant’s sBLA?
`
`92
`
`UNITED STATES DIST
`
`T JUDGE
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
