Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07—cv—00286-JJF Document 48 Filed 02/15/2008 Page 1 of 2
YOUNG CONAWAY STARGATT & TAYLOR, LLP
THE BRANDYWTNE BUILDING
1000 WEST STREET, 17Tr-1 FLOOR
KAREN L. PASCALE WILMINGTON, DELAWARE 19801 (302) 571*6600
D1REcrD1AL: (302)57l-5001 (302) 571-1253 FAX
DIRECT FAX: (302) 576—35l6 P.O, Box 391 (800) 253*2234 (DE ONLY)
k1¤¤S¤¤l¤@y¤S¢·¤0m WILMINGTON, DELAWARE 19899-0391 WWW·Y¤¤¤g¤0¤¤W¤Y-¤¤m
February 15, 2008
BY E—FILING AND HAND DELIVERY
The Honorable Joseph J. Farnan, Jr.
United States District Court
844 King Street
Wilmington, DE 19801
Re: Iovate Health Sciences USA, Inc., et al. v. WellNx LW Sciences Inc., et al.,
C.A. No. 07-286-JJF
Dear Judge Farnan:
0 This is Iovate’s reply to the February 13 letter response filed by defendants’
counsel regarding jurisdictional discovery (D.l. 47).
Iovate does not obj ect to the text of paragraphs 1-3 of defendants’ proposed
order.l Iovate’s only concern is that it not be put in the position of having to take "one—shot"
depositions of the individual defendants on all issues, prior to having any meaningful opporttmity
to take general discovery on the merits of the case. Therefore, if the Court is content to allow
Iovate to take the Woodgates' depositions in the course of general fact discovery (those "one
time" depositions to include any jurisdictional issues), then paragraphs 1-3 of defendants’
proposed order are fine with Iovate.
A Respectfully submitted, A
_ p j if MK?
Karen L. Pascale (No. 2903)
I Iovate does, however, object to the first "whereas" clause of defendants’ proposed order. As pointed out in
Iovate’s February 11 letter request (D.I. 46), the Court’s August 16, 2007 Order (D.I. 27) (did not grant the parties
leave to conduct jurisdictional discovery. That Order merely extended the time for Iovate to tile its answering brief
in response to the defendants’ motion todismiss "until a date after Plaintiffs’ Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery
has been resolved." It is completely disingenuous of defendants to suggest that they would not have vigorously
opposed any prior attempt by Iovate to take jurisdictional discovery.
DB02;6580141.1 0663721001

Case 1:O7—cv—OO286-JJF Document 48 Filed O2/15/2008 Page 2 of 2
YoUNG CoNAwAY STARGATT & TAYLOR, LLP
The Honorable Joseph J. F arnan, Jr.
February 15, 2008
Page 2
cc: Clerk of the Court (by CM/ECF and hand delivery) _
Rodger D. Smith, II, Esq. (by CM/ECF and electronic mail) J . · ,
Mary `B. Graham, (by CM/ECF and electronic mail) ° J
Roger A. Colaizzi, Esq. (by electronic mail)
Jeffrey A. Dunn, Esq. (by electronic mail) ‘
_ Tamany Vinson Bentz, Esq. (by electronic mail)
Jerry Canada, Esq. (by electronic mail)
Howard J. Shire, Esq. (by electronic mail)
Christopher W. Glynn, Esq. (by electronic mail) .
John W. Shaw, Esq. (by electronic mail)
Karen E. Keller, Esq. (by electronic mail)
_ DB02:6580l4l.l 0663724001