In an ANDA litigation, the District of Delaware recently denied the defendants’ motion to compel the production of correspondence between the plaintiffs’ testifying expert and a third-party analyst who had performed experiments and provided data used by the testifying expert. The court found that the scope of material sought by the motion was overbroad and disproportionate to the needs of the case.
As part of the plaintiffs’ infringement case, the plaintiffs’ expert engaged a third-party analyst...
Continue Reading
Sign up for FREE to read the full article and access 131K+ alternative investment headlines.
Alternative Investment News