The court granted in part defendant's motion to compel the production of prior settlement agreements concerning plaintiff's drug, Lipitor®, but not documents relating to such agreements. The settlement agreements were relevant to secondary considerations and patent misuse. With respect to secondary considerations, "[defendant's] theory is that previous commercial success is tied to [plaintiff's] since-expired . . . patent, which it asserts was a patent integral to [plaintiff's settlement with a defendant in an earlier case]." With respect to misuse, "[plaintiff] cannot merely assert that no patent misuse occurred and direct [defendant] to publicly available documents and press releases to confirm that. [Defendant] needn't take [plaintiff] or [a settling third party's] word on whether [plaintiff] misused a patent. No sane defendant would."
Pfizer Inc. et al v. Apotex Inc. et al., 1-08-cv-07231 (ILND August 4, 2010, Memorandum) (Ashman, M.J.)