Judge Nudges Agencies to Hand Over Info to Theranos Defendants
Judge Edward Davila stopped short of granting a request from lawyers for Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes to force agencies to scour their files for exculpatory evidence, but he encouraged prosecutors to help the defense get access to everything needed.
June 28, 2019 at 03:46 PM
4 minute read
SAN JOSE—The federal judge overseeing the criminal case against Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes stopped short of granting a request from her lawyers at Williams & Connolly to force the prosecution team to hand over potential defense-friendly evidence held by government agencies.
But at a hearing on the defense motion Friday, U.S. District Judge Edward Davila of the Northern District of California indicated that if the agencies ultimately withhold material requested by Holmes' lawyers, he's likely to issue an order compelling them to pony up.
Holmes and her codefendant, former COO and president Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani represented by counsel at Davis Wright Tremaine, asked Davila to compel prosecutors to direct the Food and Drug Administration, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the California Department of Public Health, and the Securities and Exchange Commission to scour their files for potential evidence that might help them defend against the government's fraud and conspiracy charges.
Federal prosecutors have indicated that they passed along the defendants' request for six different categories of information, including all the agencies' interactions with Wall Street Journal reporter John Carreyrou who chronicled the blood-testing company's regulatory struggles and the agencies' communications with rival clinical lab companies about Theranos.
Lawyers from the FDA and CMS have responded expressing concerns about the breadth of the requests and questioning whether they would produce information relevant and material to the case.
But at Friday's hearing, Davila said that it wasn't up to internal agency lawyers to decide what's relevant to former Theranos officials' defense.
“They have to provide it and then we have a conversation and then I think the judge is the person that gets to make that call, the last time I checked,” Davila said.
Davila held off granting the defense motion, but continued the hearing on the issue to Aug. 17. He said that he wanted to give the prosecution team time to convey his concerns to the agencies and give them a chance to respond to the defense requests before issuing an order.
Holmes and Balwani were indicted in June 2018 on charges relating to an alleged multimillion-dollar scheme to defraud investors, doctors and patients while boasting of revolutionary blood-testing technology. Federal prosecutors say Holmes and Balwani knew Theranos' blood analyzer could not deliver on the public promises they were making.
On Friday, Davila set jury selection in the criminal case for July 28, 2020, with trial to follow Aug. 4. Williams & Connolly's Lance Wade said that the pending trial date added extra urgency to defense concerns about getting everything they need to make trial preparations.
“There's a little bit of a pattern here where we are kicking the can down the road, but now the end of the road has been set and it's coming fast,” Wade said.
Federal prosecutor John Bostic said at Friday's hearing that the government was opposing the motion not because it didn't want the defense to have the documents, but because it didn't have access to them. He also pushed back against the defense team's suggestion that the agencies' doors were open to prosecutors when they were investigating the case but that they've been less cooperative when faced with the defense requests.
“In making these requests [to the agencies], we didn't make them with a wink. We weren't crossing our fingers when we passed them along,” Bostic said.
Davila said that he would consider the agency's progress in responding to the defense requests when deciding whether to issue an order when he takes the matter back up next month.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWilson Sonsini Knocks Out Claims Against Inhibrx Biosciences in Trade Secrets Verdict
'Blatant and Audacious': Sideman & Bancroft Wins Injunction for Biotech Startup Trilobio in Trade Secrets Theft Case
Los Angeles Secures $35M Settlement From Monsanto in Water Contamination Lawsuit
After Guiding Illumina Through Harrowing Merger Fight, GC Charles Dadswell to Depart
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-61
- 2Decision of the Day: School District's Probe Was a 'Sham'; Title IX Administrator Showed Sex-Based Bias
- 3US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 4Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
- 5McCormick Consolidates Two Tesla Chancery Cases
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250