Case Number: 1:14-cv-01651 (Dkt. 47)
Judge Forrest resolved the parties’ dispute about a protective order. She refused to permit pre-production redaction of produced documents, except for “less than a dozen  really sensitive documents,” which parties must meet and confer about before engaging in motion practice over. The court refused to permit the protective order to treat retained counsel differently from counsel of record, but did authorize the parties to brief (following a meet-and-confer) the issue of whether the parties should be required to identify to the opposing side all retained counsel. Finally, the court found a prosection bar that extended beyond claim drafting to “any involvement whatsoever in patent office proceedings” to be too broad.
The articles on our Website include some of the publications and papers authored by our attorneys, both before and after they joined our firm. The content of these articles should not be taken as legal advice.