Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 11, 2024

ChemImage Corporation v. Johnson & Johnson

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:24-cv-02646
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In ChemImage v. Johnson & Johnson, Judge Furman granted Defendants’ motion to prevent ChemImage from deposing former executive Ashley McEvoy.

Who this affects

ChemImage’s requested deposition of Ashley McEvoy was blocked after the court granted Defendants’ protective-order motion.

What happened

ChemImage sought to depose Ashley McEvoy, a former Johnson & Johnson executive, in its dispute with Johnson & Johnson and related defendants. Defendants argued that McEvoy lacked firsthand or unique knowledge about the contract and its termination.

Defendants said McEvoy received only occasional, high-level updates and that other witnesses could provide the information ChemImage sought. They asked the court for an order preventing her deposition.

Judge Furman agreed that McEvoy lacked unique or personal knowledge of the claims and granted Defendants’ letter motion substantially for the stated reasons. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
ChemImage Corporation v. Johnson & Johnson · No. 1:24-cv-02646
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
Oct. 11, 2024

Background

ChemImage sought to depose Ashley McEvoy, Johnson & Johnson’s former Executive Vice President and Worldwide Chair of MedTech. Defendants moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) for a protective order preventing the deposition.

Defendants argued that McEvoy was a high-level executive who had no firsthand involvement in Ethicon’s project with ChemImage and no unique knowledge about whether Ethicon properly terminated the contract for cause after ChemImage failed to meet an early-stage milestone. They said McEvoy did not negotiate the agreement, oversee the project, or participate in the decision to terminate it.

Defendants also argued that the documents produced in the case showed only limited involvement by McEvoy. According to the motion, she received one email during the contract negotiations, roughly a dozen high-level updates after the agreement was signed, and sent one brief email responding to an update. Defendants pointed to other witnesses and planned corporate-representative depositions as less burdensome ways for ChemImage to obtain relevant information.

Legal standard and ruling

The court applied the rule that a senior executive generally should not be deposed unless the executive has unique evidence or personal knowledge of the claims and the information cannot be obtained from other witnesses or through less burdensome means.

The court agreed with Defendants that Ashley McEvoy lacked “unique or personal knowledge of the claims at issue.” Judge Furman therefore granted Defendants’ letter motion substantially for the reasons stated in the motion. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.