Celerity, Inc. v. Ultra Clean Holding, Inc.

ORDER

Introduction

Subject matter jurisdiction is conferred on this Court under the national patent laws. 28 U.S.C. § 1331 & 1338(a). All discovery was referred by the district court (Hon. Maxine M. Chesney) as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b) and Civil Local Rule 72. The parties filed letter briefs regarding two discovery disputes and the Court heard oral argument. Robert Camors, THELEN REID BROWN RAYS-MAN & STEINER, appeared for Celerity. Lisa Kobialka, PERKINS COIE, appeared for Ultra Clean Technology and Ultra Clean Holdings (“UCT”). The matter having been fully considered and good cause appearing it is hereby ordered that Celerity’s motion at Docket # 111 to compel further discovery and for a broader definition of the scope of waiver of attorney-client privilege and the work product immunity and for extension of discovery is granted in part. UCT’s motion at Docket # 112 to deny additional discovery and for a narrower scope of waiver is denied.

Background

Celerity’s infringement allegations, are based on its belief that UCT is making, selling, and offering for sale products which infringe one or more of the patents in suit, specifically through the Predator product…