Bayer AG v. Apotex Inc.
T-35-96
Rothstein J.
4/9/98
3 pp.
Motion by Bayer to strike portions of Apotex's memorandum of fact and law-In memorandum of fact and law, Apotex making reference to German, Spanish patents-Whether portions of Apotex's memorandum of fact and law should be struck as irrelevant-Parties generally should be discouraged from bringing interlocutory motions to strike portions of memorandums of fact and law on basis of irrelevancy-To extent memorandum ambiguous, contains irrelevant material, counsel runs risk of confusing issues, arguments, as well as frustrating hearing judge who must sort out relevant from irrelevant, clarify counsel's arguments-Costly, time consuming interlocutory motions to be discouraged-Hearing judge should deal with arguments as presented-Should party inappropriately include irrelevant information in memorandum, hearing judge may penalize such conduct in award of costs-Motion dismissed.