what i don't know is discovery in a patent case specifically, especially when most of the information is readily available - in the form of the ANDA applicatiion and related correspondence with the FDA
No doubt there will be a lot of info in the ANDA filing and all the submissions. That alone will take many man-years to absorb and sumarize. But there will also be tens of thousands of internal emails, dozens of witnesses to depose.
Unlike a normal law suit seeking damages, the TRO and PI are done very early and are critical (at least historically) to doing justice in a patent case.
So if counsel for MNTA/Sandoz are to be expected to present their case for TRO and PI early, a judge may want to give them this time before approval to do discovery.
IF I were the judge, I would be inclined to warn TEVA that to the extent they prevail upon me in slowing discovery, at a time when it cannot interfere with their commercial rights, that I would be more inclined to grant the TRO to make up the time to the litigant who needs to present their side of the case - a case where much of the information is exclusively in the hands of the opposing party.
I bet that would get their attention.
BTW - I am again venturing off into an area in which I am unqualified. I did have a patent law course in law school some 35 years ago.
So some of the real patent lawyers can feel free to correct me.
ij
There are times when rules and precedents cannot be broken; others when they cannot be adhered to with safety. (Thomas Joplin)