`
`M O R R I S , N I C H O L S , A R S H T & T U N N E L L L L P
`
`1201 N O R TH M A R K E T S TR E E T
`P.O. B O X 1347
`WI LM I NG TON, D E L AW A RE 19899-1347
`
`
`
`(302) 658-9200
`
`(302) 658-3989 FAX
`
`ANTHONY RAUCCI
`
`(302) 351-9392
`
`(302) 498-6201 FAX
`
`araucci@mnat.com
`
`
`
`March 28, 2019
`
`The Honorable Leonard P. Stark
`United States District Court
` For the District of Delaware
`844 North King Street
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`
`VIA ELECTRONIC FILING
`
`Re:
`
`Bayer Healthcare LLC, et al. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. et al.,
`C.A. No. 16-1221-LPS (Consolidated)
`
`
`Dear Chief Judge Stark:
`
`The Plaintiffs (“Bayer”) and the Apotex Defendants in the above-referenced matter write
`to request the scheduling of a discovery teleconference.
`
`The following attorneys, including at least one Delaware Counsel and at least one Lead
`Counsel per party, participated in a verbal meet-and-confer by telephone on the following date:
`March 26, 2019.
`
`Delaware Counsel: Anthony Raucci (for Bayer) and Kenneth Dorsney (for Apotex);
`
`Lead Counsel: Dov Grossman, Seth Bowers, and Ben Picozzi (for Bayer); and Phil
`Kouyoumdjian and Ian Scott (for Apotex).
`
`The parties were unable to resolve the dispute during this meet-and-confer. The dispute
`requiring judicial attention is listed below:
`
`Whether relief is warranted where Plaintiffs have requested
`unexpired samples of Apotex’s ANDA product to test for
`infringement but Apotex only has expired product.1
`
`
`1 Apotex states that it is providing expired ANDA product to Plaintiffs’ experts. Bayer will
`respond concerning this point in its letter brief.
`
`
`
`Case 1:16-cv-01221-LPS Document 118 Filed 03/28/19 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 880
`
`
`March 28, 2019
`Page 2
`
`
`
`Counsel for the parties are available at the Court’s convenience should Your Honor have
`any questions.
`
`Respectfully,
`
`/s/ Anthony Raucci
`
`Anthony Raucci
`
`
`cc:
`
`
`Clerk of Court (by hand delivery)
`All Counsel of Record (by e-mail)
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
