`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`
`WIRTGEN AMERICA, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`CATERPILLAR, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 1:17-cv-00770-JDW
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`
`AND NOW, this 5th day of January, 2024, upon consideration of Plaintiff Wirtgen
`
`America, Inc.’s Motion to Compel the Production of Documents Related to Previously
`
`Undisclosed Defense(s) (D.I. 271) and following a telephone conference with counsel for
`
`the Parties, it is ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED. During his deposition, Mr.
`
`Engelmann testified that while Caterpillar relied on its lawyers to form its non-
`
`infringement belief, Mr. Engelmann’s own views of non-infringement were not based on
`
`the advice of counsel. He only offered his personal views when pressed and in response
`
`to a question that instructed him to set aside advice of counsel and to share his own views.
`
`Therefore, Caterpillar hasn’t put the advice of its counsel at issue.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BY THE COURT:
`
`/s/ Joshua D. Wolson
`JOSHUA D. WOLSON, J.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`