Fate Therapeutics, Inc. v. Shoreline Biosciences, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaApril 20, 20233:22-cv-00676California1,182 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 FATE THERAPEUTICS, INC.; and Case No.: 22-cv-00676-H-MSB

WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE FOR

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH, ORDER:

13 Plaintiffs, (1) GRANTING JOINT MOTIONS 14 v. FOR DETERMINATION OF A DISCOVERY DISPUTE; AND SHORELINE BIOSCIENCES, INC.; and

DAN S. KAUFMAN, [Doc. Nos. 248, 249.] Defendants. (2) DENYING PLAINTIFFS’

MOTIONS TO COMPEL WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

20 On April 14, 2023, the parties filed two joint motions for determination of a 21 discovery dispute. (Doc. Nos. 248, 249.) In the first joint filing, Plaintiffs Fate 22 Therapeutics, Inc. (“Fate”) and Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 23 (“Whitehead”) request to add Dr. Robert Hollingsworth as an additional ESI custodian 24 pursuant to the Court’s October 12, 2022 order governing discovery of electronically stored 25 information (“ESI Order”). (Doc. No. 248.) Plaintiffs assert that adding…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.