Genentech, Inc. v. Biogen MA, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. California
DecidedJune 11, 2025
Docket4:23-cv-00909
StatusUnknown

This text of Genentech, Inc. v. Biogen MA, Inc. (Genentech, Inc. v. Biogen MA, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Genentech, Inc. v. Biogen MA, Inc., (N.D. Cal. 2025).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 GENETECH, INC. 7 Plaintiff, Case No. 23-cv-909-YGR

8 v. PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 3 RE: PRETRIAL 9 BIOGEN MA, INC., CONFERENCE 10 Defendant. 11

12 Having considered the filings to date and the arguments and other submissions at the 13 Pretrial Conference, held on June 9, 2025, for good cause shown the Court enters the following 14 orders: 15 1. Trial Date and Schedule: The trial of this matter is confirmed to proceed in Courtroom 1 on 16 June 27, 2025. Jury selection shall occur that day and trial evidence, including opening 17 statements shall proceed on Monday, June 30, 2025. 18 2. Trial itself shall commence daily at 8:30 a.m. with six hours, 10 minutes of daily trial time. 19 Counsel shall arrive in court early enough to proceed promptly at 8:00 a.m. with the Court to 20 discuss issues outside the presence of the jury. Trial schedule will be: 21 8:30 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. (1 hour, 30 min), then a twenty-minute break; 22 10:20 a.m. to 11:50 a.m. (1 hour, 30 min), then a forty-minute break; 23 12:30 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. (1 hour, 30 min), then a twenty-minute break; 24 2:20 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. (1 hour, 40 min) 25 3. Additional time may be scheduled for matters outside the presence of the jury as necessary and 26 determined by the Court. Sidebars are not permitted. Counsel should be prepared to anticipate 27 issues so that they may be addressed outside of normal trial hours. 1 statements and closing arguments. The Court shall reserve one hour each for plaintiff and 2 defendant for closing arguments. The parties shall receive daily timesheets advising of the 3 time remaining. Any concerns must be raised immediately or will be waived. 4 5. Standard Motions in Limine: The Court hereby orders that: (a) witnesses shall be excluded 5 until testimony is completed; (b) there shall be no reference to or evidence presented of 6 settlement discussions, mediation, or insurance; and (c) there shall be no reference to or 7 evidence presented of wealth or lack thereof of any party except in the punitive damage phase 8 of a case, to the extent it exists. 9 A motion in limine refers “to any motion, whether made before or during trial, to exclude 10 anticipated prejudicial evidence before the evidence is actually offered.” Luce v. United 11 States, 469 U.S. 38, 40, n. 2 (1984). The Court’s rulings on the motions in limine will be 12 issued by separate orders. 13 6. Parties are ordered to admonish witnesses of the Court’s rulings. Failure to comply with a 14 ruling by the Court may result in sanctions, including without limitation the striking of the 15 witness’s entire testimony. 16 7. Witnesses: The parties are limited to calling the witnesses submitted on the list filed for the 17 Pretrial Conference. Upon a showing of good cause, including for rebuttal or impeachment 18 purposes, additional witnesses will only be allowed by Court order. 19 8. This Order confirms that the parties shall deliver via email a single joint list of all witnesses, 20 attorneys, and others involved in the trial, in alphabetical order to be shown to prospective 21 jurors during voir dire. 22 9. Stipulations/Trial Notices/Trial Subpoenas: The parties proposed Stipulations can be 23 found at Docket No. 169 and are accepted as modified. 24 10.Exhibits and Exhibit Lists: The parties are limited to using the Exhibits submitted on the 25 Exhibit List. No witness may be shown any document or other object until it has been marked 26 for identification using an exhibit number. The parties shall file updated Exhibit Lists 27 identifying those for which a stipulation of admissibility exists with an “S” in the appropriate 1 11.Given the length of the exhibit list, the parties confirm that they are proceeding with witness 2 binders. Standing Order re PreTrial Instructions, ¶ 6.h.iii. 3 12.Parties are reminded that the jury may not be shown any exhibits until admitted into evidence 4 or stipulated by the parties as to admissibility without the express permission of the Court. 5 Standing Order re PreTrial Instructions, ¶ 6.f.iii. 6 13.The parties shall resubmit the Joint Trial Exhibit List in portrait format and shall include the 7 only the columns shown on the Appendix to the Court’s standing order on civil trials. The 8 filing shall occur by Monday, June 23, 2025. 9 14.Equipment: Projectors, screens and similar equipment must be tested in the courtroom prior 10 to the day when it will be used. Arrangements may be made with the Courtroom Deputy, 11 Edwin Cuenco, at (510) 637-3540, as to appropriate time for doing so. Counsel shall send the 12 Court a proposed form of order if they would like to bring equipment into the courthouse. The 13 United States Marshal Service requires an order. 14 15.Parties may use encrypted digital wireless system that includes a receiver and transmitter with 15 XLR connector. 16 16.The parties shall review the Court’s policy regarding the jury’s use of a computer during 17 deliberations at http://cand.uscourts.gov/jurypc. 18 17.Jurors and Peremptory Challenges: The Court will seat a total of eight (8) jurors and no 19 alternates. The Court sets the number of peremptory challenges at three (3). Motions under 20 Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) for improper use of challenges must be made in a 21 timely fashion. Argument on the same shall be made outside the presence of the jury panel. 22 The Court will conduct the voir dire but will allow each side 15 minutes for follow-up. 23 18.In accordance with Model Rule of Professional Conduct 3.5(b) and Formal Opinion for 466, 24 the parties "may review a juror's or potential juror's Internet presence, which may include 25 postings by the juror or potential juror in advance of and during the trial, but . . . may not 26 communicate directly or through another with a juror or potential juror." A party "may not, 27 either personally or through another, send an access request to a juror's electronic social media. 1 has not made public and that would not be the type of ex parte communication prohibited by 2 Model Rule 3.5(b)." Further, to the extent that a party asks any follow-up questions to a 3 prospective juror during voir dire regarding information obtained from the review, the party 4 shall disclose the review to the juror. 5 19.Jury Instructions: Revised jury instructions in accordance with the discussion held shall be 6 submitted to the Court no later than noon on June 12, 2025. 7 20.Expert Disclosures/Fed. R. Civ. P. 68 Offers: By June 12, 2025, and to the extent not 8 already provided, counsel shall lodge with the Court a copy of all expert reports, including any 9 supplements. Offers of judgment made under Fed. R. Civ. P. 68 shall be lodged no later than 10 June 27, 2025. 11 21.Depositions to be Used at Trial: Any party intending to use a deposition transcript at trial for 12 any purpose shall lodge the signed original (or a certified/stipulated copy if, for any reason, the 13 original is not available) for use by the Court and shall have extra copies available for use by 14 the questioning lawyer and the witness. All other parties are expected to have their own 15 copies available. The parties shall each prepare and provide an index of the lodged transcripts 16 and shall review the same with the courtroom deputy upon lodging the transcripts. The index 17 shall provide a space for the party and the courtroom deputy to confirm delivery of and receipt 18 of each transcript. Delivery of the transcripts shall occur no later than June 12, 2025.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Luce v. United States
469 U.S. 38 (Supreme Court, 1984)
Batson v. Kentucky
476 U.S. 79 (Supreme Court, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Genentech, Inc. v. Biogen MA, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/genentech-inc-v-biogen-ma-inc-cand-2025.