Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., et al.

November 5, 2014

Case Number: 1:13-cv-03777-AKH

Judge Hellerstein resolved a number of discovery-related motions.  First he found that defendants’ motion to strike plaintiff’s infringement contentions should be denied.  He indicated that although the infringement contentions appeared to be inadequate, JP Morgan failed to make a motion to strike at that time, and instead made an initial document production.  He did, however, permit JP Morgan to take discovery in relation to the infringement contentions.

The court denied plaintiff’s request to compel the production of documents related to damages and royalties calculations.  The denial was based on the fact that the information sought was highly sensitive and plaintiff had not shown that it was entitled to it.  The court deferred all damages-related discovery to a later time, and provided the parties with leave to renew at a later date.

In addition to resolving a number of motions to compel related to interrogatory responses, the court addressed the plaintiff’s assertion of privilege in relation to certain documents identified in its privilege log.  After an in-camera review of the documents, Judge Hellerstein determined that the identified documents were generated for the purpose of evaluating a patent’s validity related to the decision to acquire the patent.  Because the plaintiff’s business consisted of acquiring and litigating patents, the documents were predominantly business related and were not privileged.  He instructed the parties to work together to identify such documents and to exchange an amended privilege log.