And if you do want the latest. . . just for grins -- do read it, if you used to come here for Merck related material -- it is interesting; and a bit:
. . . .The parties respectfully request that the Court resolve whether the Defendant can disclose two deposition excerpts in a lawsuit between the Defendant and its insurance carrier under the Stipulation and Protective Order Regarding Confidentiality of Documents and Other Information Produced in Discovery entered by the Court on March 6, 2017 (ECF 67, hereinafter, the “Protective Order”). The parties have met and conferred in good faith on this issue, but have been unable to reach a resolution.
Defendant is involved in litigation with its insurance carrier, HDI-Gerling America Insurance Company (“HDI”), concerning potential coverage related to this action. EMD Millipore Corp. & Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany v. HDI-Gerling America Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 1:20-cv10244 (D. Mass.) (the “Insurance Action”). The precise nature of Plaintiffs’ contentions in this action is directly relevant to whether Defendant is entitled to insurance coverage and thus to Defendant’s claim against HDI in the Insurance Action.
Although some of this information is available at a fairly general level in the Complaint, Defendants have identified two deposition questions and answers from the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of Plaintiffs in which Plaintiffs clarified their position as to how they have been harmed by Defendant’s advertising that is the basis of Plaintiffs’ false advertising causes of action (together the “Requested Disclosures”). . . .
Now you know. . . onward, to a better. . . tomorrow. Grin.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment