Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Chamberlain Group v. Lear Corp.

July 13, 2010

CHAMBERLAIN GROUP
v.
THE LEAR CORP ET AL.



Name of Assigned Judge Amy J. St. Eve Sitting Judge if Other or Magistrate Judge than Assigned Judge

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

Plaintiff Chamberlain Group, Inc.'s motion for a protective order [498] is granted in part and denied in part.

O[ For further details see text below.] Notices mailed by Judicial staff.

STATEMENT

Plaintiff Chamberlain Group, Inc. ("Chamberlain") has filed a motion ("Motion") for a protective order, seeking to preclude Defendant, Lear Corporation ("Lear"), from (1) obtaining certain financial information from Chamberlain, (2) taking discovery related to Chamberlain's development of a new algorithm, and (3) further deposing Jim Fitzgibbon. For the following reasons, the Court grants in part and denies in part the Motion.

LEGAL STANDARD

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that a "court may, for good cause, issue an order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense." Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)(1). The moving party bears the burden of showing good cause for a protective order. See ISA Chicago Wholesale, Inc. v. Khan, No. 09 CV 3942, 2010 WL 2266463, at *2 (N.D. Ill. June 3, 2010); Johnson v. Jung, 242 F.R.D. 481, 482 (N.D. Ill. 2007).

Courtroom Deputy KF

Initials:

ANALYSIS

I. 30(b)(6) Deposition Topics 4, 5, and 9 and Related Discovery Requests

On April 1, 2010, Lear served Chamberlain with a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6) notice of deposition requesting -- among other things -- that Chamberlain designate one or more persons to testify regarding:

* "The sales, revenues, costs, and profits for each sold product allegedly encompassed by any claims of the Asserted Patents. The person prepared to address this topic should address financial information and spreadsheets relating to allegedly patented products, including questions about such facts as the gross sales, cost of goods sold, costs of development, royalties, and profits." (R. 500-1, Ex. 1, Def.'s R. 30(b)(6) Notice of Dep. of Chamberlain at Topic 4.)

* "The portion of sales, revenues, profits, or other value of each sold product allegedly encompassed by any claims of the Asserted Patents (such as Chamberlains' [sic] Security Code Guard, and Clicker products) that is attributable to the alleged invention in those ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.