`18143
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`
`
`
`C. A. No.: 18-924-CFC
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` )
`
`
`
`GENENTECH, INC. and CITY OF HOPE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`
`AMGEN INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`[PROPOSED] ORDER
`
`
`
`
`AND NOW, this __________ day of ____________________, 2019, having considered
`
`Amgen Inc.’s discovery dispute letter in C.A. No. 18-924 seeking to compel production of
`
`certain licensing and settlement agreements, related documents, and Rule 30(b)(6) testimony
`
`related thereto (D.I. 191) (the “Motion to Compel”) and the responses thereto, and having held a
`
`discovery conference on May 16, 2019 regarding the same;
`
`
`
`IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Amgen’s Motion to Compel is GRANTED-IN-PART
`
`AND DENIED-IN-PART WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Genentech, Inc. (“Genentech”) shall
`
`produce licensing and/or settlement agreements resolving the following actions:
`
`a. Genentech, Inc., et al. v. Pfizer, Inc., C.A. No. 17-1672-CFC (D. Del);
`
`b. Genentech, Inc., et al. v. Celltrion, Inc. et al., C.A. No. 18-0095-CFC (D. Del.);
`
`c. Genentech, Inc., et al. v. Celltrion, Inc. et al., C.A. No. 18-1025-CFC (D. Del.);
`
`d. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., IPR 2016-01693; and
`
`e. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., IPR 2016-01694.
`
`
`ME1 30508642v.1
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-00924-CFC-SRF Document 225 Filed 05/23/19 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
`18144
`
`
`
`While Genentech may redact the agreed-upon launch dates and confidential terms that are not
`
`relevant to the consideration for the licenses, Genentech may not redact any other terms of the
`
`licensing and/or settlement agreements that have any relevance to the value placed upon any of
`
`the patents implicated therein, including but not limited to royalties, lump sum payments, or any
`
`other consideration identified in the agreements. See Hearing Tr. (May 16, 2019) at 67-77.
`
`
`
`The Motion to Compel with respect to Amgen’s Inc.’s Request for Production Nos. 27,
`
`31, 32, and 65 and Rule 30(b)(6) Topic Nos. 29 and 30 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
`
`
`
`
`
`___________________________
`United States District Judge
`
`
`ME1 30508642v.1
`
`2
`
`