Access to Intranet Denied when Documents Provided in Searchable Form

Fenster Family Patient Holdings, Inc. v. Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc., 2005 WL 2304190 (D.Del. Sept. 20, 2005)

Fenster Family Patient Holdings, Inc. and others (collectively “Fenster”) filed this lawsuit alleging infringement of various patents by Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. and other Siemens entities (collectively “Siemens”). The patents were issued in connection with Digital Angiography and Digital Fluoroscopy (“DF”) technology. The Court addressed a number of motions in this opinion, including a renewed motion for access to Siemens’ Intranet.

The motion had been denied earlier, partly because Siemens had represented that it would produce materials in electronically searchable format. Yet, according to Fenster, Siemens had provided access to a warehouse containing millions of pages of documents that were not electronically searchable. Furthermore, many of the electronically produced materials were not searchable. Siemens replied that it would produce documents previously identified as non-searchable in searchable form, but some old materials are only available on microfilm and it need only produce materials in the format in which they are maintained (as per the Federal Rules of Evidence.)

Fenster also argued for access based on testimony by a Siemens deponent. This testimony indicated that it would be easy to determine whether documents from Pie Medical exist on Siemens’ Intranet. Siemens had not produced anything from Pie Medical, and Fenster alleged that this was new evidence in support of granting access.

The Court again denied the motion, finding that Fenster had failed to demonstrate a change in controlling law, the availability of new evidence since the first order, or the need to correct a clear error to prevent manifest injustice.