Proofpoint, Inc. v. Vade Secure, Incorporated
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EUREKA DIVISION 7 PROOFPOINT, INC., et al., Case No. 19-cv-04238-MMC (RMI)
Plaintiffs,
ORDER
v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 446, 448 VADE SECURE, INCORPORATED, et al., Defendants.
13 Now pending before the court are a pair of discovery dispute letter briefs.1 In one letter brief, Defendants seek an order compelling Plaintiffs to produce “Proofpoint third-party materials” despite the fact that the period for permissible fact discovery closed several months ago. See Ltr. Br. (dkt.) 448) at 2. In the other letter brief, Plaintiffs seek to file supplemental expert reports, due to Defendants’ discovery misconduct, while asking the court to strike portions of Defendants’ rebuttal reports for the same reason; at the same time, Defendants ask the court to strike portions of Plaintiffs’ opening reports, and an order striking Plaintiffs’ supplemental reports in their entirety, characterizing them as unauthorized “reply reports.” See Ltr. Br. (dkt. 446) at…