Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 MAY 2023

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: March 2023

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Contributor
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP is one of the world’s largest firms focusing on...

View firm profile
Explore more from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

In Kologik Capital, LLC v. In Force Technology, LLC, No. 18-cv-11168, Magistrate Judge Levenson granted in part the Plaintiff's motion for further deposition.

United StatesIntellectual Property

This is part of a series of articles discussing recent orders of interest issued in patent cases by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

In Kologik Capital, LLC v. In Force Technology, LLC, No. 18-cv-11168, Magistrate Judge Levenson granted in part the Plaintiff's motion for further deposition.

During fact discovery, the parties agreed to "work together in good faith to find an alternative deposition date" for a witness. Later, pursuant to an order granting in part the Plaintiff's motion to compel, the Defendant made a large production of documents, prompting the Plaintiff to seek and the magistrate judge then assigned to the case allowing the Plaintiff to "take three depositions" limited to the late-produced documents. The Plaintiff then noticed the depositions of the witness the parties had previously agreed to, as well as two additional witnesses, one of which was noticed personally and as the Defendant's Rule 30(b)(6)

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from