In re HIV Antitrust Litigation

INTRODUCTION

18 The plaintiffs subpoenaed non-party Dr. John Cogan, a former board member of defendant 19 Gilead.1 Dr. Cogan now moves to quash the deposition subpoena.2 Dr. Cogan claims that the 20 deposition would be unduly burdensome because he (1) is a “busy individual,” (2) has no memory 21 of certain events, and (3) lacks any relevant non-privileged knowledge.3 The plaintiffs assert that 22 they should not be forced to accept Dr. Cogan’s declaration that he lacks knowledge at face value 23 and should be able to depose him about general non-privileged information concerning certain 24 25 1 Unredacted Sealed Disc. Ltr. – ECF No. 921-1 at 2; Redacted Disc. Ltr. – ECF No. 922 at 2. Citations refer to material in the Electronic Case File (ECF); pinpoint citations are to the ECF- generated page numbers at the top of documents. 27 2 Unredacted Sealed Disc. Ltr. – ECF No. 921-1 at 1. Gilead practices.* They also note that the deposition would be virtual and present minimal 2 |} burden. The court can decide the dispute without oral argument. Civ. L. R. 7-1(b). Dr. Cogan has || not established that the deposition is an undue burden. The court thus denies the motion to…