Sovaldi® Patent Battle Update: Was A Gilead Atty-Client Privileged Document Disclosed In Error?

Late yesterday, the lawyers for the Merck related parties filed a letter with the Delaware District Court, asking for a ruling from the court on whether a specific document is privileged, and thus exempt from discovery. [Back in May 2015, Merck prevailed on an issue involving one of the Sovaldi® patents’ claim construction; thus the graphic at right.]

That the current document in dispute has been Bates stamped — and marked in, as a “Gilead” document — means that it has been turned over to the Merck-related parties. That in turn was apparently (at least allegedly) an error. Usually errant disclosure creates a rebuttable presummption of waiver of privilege, if memory serves. In any event, here’s the bit:

. . . .Defendants have requested the return, sequester, or destruction of the document bearing production number GILEAD04008224 on the basis of the attorney-client privilege. Plaintiffs have challenged Defendants’ claim of privilege. The parties request a judicial determination regarding Defendants’ privilege claim. . . .

We will keep you informed, as to how this turns out. Onward.


There are no comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: