ReedHycalog UK, Ltd. et al v. Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations Inc et al, No. 6:06-cv-00222 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 24, 2007)

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Before the Court is US Synthetic Corp. and Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.’s (collectively “US Synthetic”) Motion to Compel 30(b)(6) Deposition Testimony and Production of Documents (Docket No. 75). After considering the parties’ briefs and oral arguments, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the motion. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs ReedHycalog UK, Ltd and Grant Prideco, Inc. (collectively “ReedHycalog”) accuse US Synthetic of infringing its U.S. Patent Nos.