ALJ Gildea Grants Motion To Compel In Certain Microelectromechanical Systems (“MEMS Devices”) (337-TA-876)

Posted On: July 3, 2013   by: and

On June 21, 2013, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 7 (dated June 18, 2013) in Certain Microelectromechanical Systems (“MEMS Devices”) and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-876).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea granted-in-part Complainant STMicroelectronics, Inc.’s (“STM”) motion to compel Respondent InvenSense, Inc. (“InvenSense”) to produce documents and a privilege log.

According to the Order, in its motion, STM argued that InvenSense had “not produced a single document” and had withheld its privilege log even though it agreed to produce documents in response to requests for production.  Thus, STM sought to compel InvenSense to produce documents responsive to its Requests for Production.  InvenSense opposed the motion, arguing that it was filed in violation of the Ground Rules, and was baseless, premature, and moot because it had produced some documents and would produce more.  Moreover, InvenSense argued, that STM failed to properly signal that there was an “impasse” and had not produced any significant amount of documents themselves.  STM later withdrew the privilege log portion of its motion based on a stipulation between the parties.

ALJ Gildea granted-in-part STM’s motion, determining that Invensense’s concern that STM had not met the ground rules was unfounded and that Invensense had agreed to produce responsive, non-privileged documents.  The ALJ noted that Invensense had begun the process of collecting, reviewing, and producing documents, but also recognized that STM’s issues with Invensense’s progress had not been successfully resolved at the meeting between the parties.  Accordingly, the ALJ ordered Invensense, to the extent it had not yet done so, to produce on a rolling basis non-privileged documents responsive to the Requests for Production at issue “as soon as practicable, but certainly by no later than July 1, 2013.”  ALJ Gildea also ordered the parties to either reach a private stipulation or to file a well-supported motion seeking a Protective Order addendum as they had not yet been successful in stipulating to heightened source code protections.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.