Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited v. The Trizetto Group, Inc. et al
| Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited |
| The Trizetto Group, Inc. and Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. |
| 1:2015cv00211 |
| January 12, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Lorna G. Schofield |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
1134
ORDER granting 1104 Motion for Attorney Fees. The remaining compensatory damages judgments entered in this case -- (1) the $142,427,596 New York trade secret misappropriation award and (2) the $59,100,000 copyright infringement award -- are VACATED. TriZetto's motion for attorney's fees in the amount of $14,548,992.98 is GRANTED. Entry of an amended judgment is stayed until April 30, 2024, so that the parties may (1) discuss a possible resolution and (2) file any follow-on motions. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motion at Dkt. 1104. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 3/13/2024) (jca) Transmission to Finance Unit (Cashiers) for processing.
|
|
Filing
1132
ORDER granting 1103 Letter Motion to Seal. For the reasons stated in this letter, TriZetto's motion to seal Exhibit 1 is GRANTED. However, the parties' confidentiality stipulations are not dispositive to the question of whether documents should be filed under seal. Accordingly, TriZetto's request to file Exhibits 2, 4, 9 and 10 under seal is DENIED without prejudice to renewal. By March 12, 2024, Syntel may file a letter motion, not to exceed three pages, renewing the motion to seal those exhibits with a justification that is sufficient under Second Circuit caselaw. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to maintain Dkt. 1106 under seal pending a potential renewal of the motion by Syntel, and to close the motion at Dkt. 1103. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 3/5/2024) (mml)
|
|
Filing
1095
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall meet and confer. By July 14, 2023, the parties shall file a joint letter proposing how to proceed in this matter. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 6/26/2023) (tg)
|
|
Filing
1092
NOTICE AND ORDER TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the accompanying declaration of Gianni Cutri, and subject to the approval of the Court, Benjamin A. Herbert hereby withdraws as counsel for Defendants/Counterclaim- Plaintiffs The TriZetto Group, Inc., n/k/a Cognizant TriZetto Software Group, Inc. and Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. (collectively, TriZetto), and shall be removed from the Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) no tification list in the above-captioned matter. TriZetto will continue to be presented by Adam R. Alper, Gianni L. Cutri, Andrew J. Morrill, Jacob Christian Rambeau, Joshua L. Simmons, Justin Singh, Kyle Kantarek, Leslie Schmidt, Michael W. De V ries, Patricia A. Carson, Ryan P. Kane, and Samuel F. Blake in this proceeding. Application GRANTED. Pursuant to Local Rule 1.4, remaining counsel for Defendants shall serve a copy of the application to withdraw on their client. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate Benjamin Herbert's receipt of ECF notifications. Attorney Benjamin Herbert terminated. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 1/3/2023) (tg)
|
|
Filing
1086
NOTICE AND ORDER TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the accompanying declaration of Cecilia Copperman, and subject to the approval of the Court, Cecilia Copperman hereby withdraws as counsel for Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauri tius Limited and Syntel, Inc., and shall be removed from the Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) notification list in the above captioned matter. Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited and Syntel, Inc. will continue to be p resented by Nicholas P. Groombridge, Jaren Janghorbani, J. Steven Baughman, Kripa Raman, Crystal Parker, and Joshua D. Reich in this proceeding. Application GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate Cecilia Copperman's receipt of ECF notifications. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 3/25/2022) Attorney Cecilia Copperman terminated. (ks)
|
|
Filing
1007
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that parties' proposed redactions are accepted for the reasons explained in the chart below. (As further set forth in this Order.) It is further ORDERED that the parties shall file the documents in redacted form on the public docket by June 25, 2021. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 6/11/2021) (cf)
|
|
Filing
1003
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs' request for approval of the supersedeas bond and stay of execution of judgment pursuant to Rule 62(b) is GRANTED. The supersedeas bond in the form attached to Plaintiffs declaration at Docket No. 998 is approved. Execution of the judgment entered on May 18, 2021, is stayed. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 6/3/2021) (cf) Transmission to Finance Unit (Cashiers) for processing.
|
|
Filing
994
FINAL JUDGMENT: A jury trial commenced in the above-captioned case on October 19, 2020, and on October 27, 2020, the jury reached and returned its unanimous verdict finding: TriZetto should be awarded $284,855,192 for Syntel's misapprop riation of TriZettos trade secrets under the DTSA; $142,427,596 for Syntel's misappropriation of TriZetto's trade secrets under New York law; $59,100,000 for Syntel's infringement of TriZetto's copyrights; that the tot al amount of compensatory damages TriZetto is entitled to receive is $284,855,192; and that TriZetto was entitled to punitive damages in the amount of $569,710,384. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 5/18/2021) (cf)
|
|
Filing
977
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION re: 928 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law. filed by Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., The Trizetto Group, Inc., 974 LETTER MOTION for Oral Argument on Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, a New Trial, or Remittitur Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil procedure 50(b) and 59 (Dkt. 959; Dkt. 960) and on Defendants' Motion for a Permanent In filed by Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., The Trizetto Group, Inc ., 965 MOTION for Permanent Injunction and Pre- and Post-Judgment Interest. filed by Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., The Trizetto Group, Inc., 959 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law , A New Trial or Remittitur und er Rules 50(b) and 59. filed by Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited, Syntel, Inc., 921 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law . filed by Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited, Syntel, Inc., 968 LETTER MOTION for Oral Argument addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Nicholas Groombridge dated January 29, 2021. filed by Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited, Syntel, Inc.. Accordingly, equitable considerations counsel aga inst awarding prejudgment interest in this case. Post-judgment interest, which is mandatory for any money judgment recovered in a civil case, see 28 U.S.C. § 1961, is granted. For the foregoing reasons, Syntel's motions for judgment as a matter of law, or in the alternative for a new trial or remittitur, pursuant to Rules 50 and 59 are DENIED, except that Syntel's request for a new trial or remittitur on punitive damages is GRANTED. The punitive damages award of $ 569,710,384 will be reduced to $284,855,192 if TriZetto agrees to remittitur. Otherwise, Syntel's motion for a new trial on the issue of punitive damages is granted. TriZetto shall advise the Court of its decision no later than May 4, 20 21. TriZetto's applications for permanent injunction and post-judgment interest are GRANTED and the request for prejudgment interest is DENIED. By May 4, 2021 the parties shall meet and confer and submit a proposed order for a permanen t injunction consistent with this Opinion and Rule 65(d). TriZetto's Rule 50(a) motion and the parties' requests for oral argument on the motions are DENIED as moot. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. Nos. 921, 928, 959, 965, 968, 974. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 4/20/2021) (ks)
|
|
Filing
970
NOTICE AND ORDER TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL: Melissa R. Alpert hereby withdraws as counsel for Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited and Syntel, Inc, and shall be removed from the Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) notification list in the above-captioned matter. (As further set forth in this Order.) Attorney Melissa Alpert terminated. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 2/3/2021) (cf)
|
|
Filing
940
ORDER: ORDERED that the parties shall brief their proposed post-trial motions -- which include Syntel's motion for judgment as a matter of law or, in the alternative, a new trial or remittitur, Syntel's proposal that the Court make further findings on its equitable defenses of laches and unclean hands, TriZetto's motions for a permanent injunction and for pre- and post-judgment interest, and TriZetto's unclean hands defense -- according to the following schedule: Motions due by 12/4/2020., Responses due by 1/29/2021, Replies due by 2/9/2021. No party shall exceed seventy-five (75) pages of briefing in total. The parties shall email a courtesy copy of their memoranda of law with hyperlinks to Westlaw for any cited cases and hyperlinks to any cited exhibits and testimony from the record. The parties shall otherwise comply with the Court's Individual Rules, and if in effect, the Emergency Individual Rules andPractices in light of COVID-19. It is further ORDERED that per the parties' agreement, any motion for attorneys' fees will be filed and briefed following entry of a final judgment on appeal. It is further ORDERED that by November 13, 2020, the parties shall file a letter providing an update regarding potential agreements for interim measures prior to adjudication of TriZetto's motion for a permanent injunction. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 11/09/2020) (ama)
|
|
Filing
934
ORDER re: 932 Letter filed by Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited, Syntel, Inc.. For the reasons stated at the conference, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall file a joint letter by November 6, 2020, proposing a revised cr oss-motion briefing schedule -- contemplating four briefs total and reasonable page limits -- along with a plan for any issues that remain to be tried. The letter should also inform the Court of any agreement on (i) holding the motions for attorneys' fees in abeyance and (ii) interim measures prior to the adjudication of any motion for permanent injunction. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 11/3/2020) (kv)
|
|
Filing
930
ORDER: It is ORDERED that the parties shall file a joint letter by Friday, October 30, 2020, proposing a mutually agreeable procedure and schedule for all matters that remain to be tried and adjudicated by the Court, both before and after entry of judgment and, if not all matters are mutually agreed upon, also describing the separate proposals. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/28/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
923
ORDER: It is ORDERED that for reasons that will be explained at a convenient time at trial: 1. Plaintiffs/Counterclaim-Defendants Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited and Syntel, Inc.'s application to admit PTX 1530 - 1533, 1535, 1537 - 3539, into evidence or as demonstrative aids (Dkt. No. 918) is DENIED. 2. Defendants/Counterclaim-Plaintiffs The TriZetto Group, Inc. and Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp.'s application to admit into evidence documents to show that these exh ibits and the documents shown at trial were pirated (Dkt. No. 920) is also DENIED. Counsel are cautioned that the statements of counsel not adopted by the witness (in this instance Mr. Bergeron during his cross-examination about the Google search) are not evidence and should not be referred to in closing argument. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/24/2020) (ama)
|
|
Filing
906
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that Syntel's breach of contract claim regarding transition rebates is DISMISSED with prejudice. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/19/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
896
ORDER: It is ORDERED that Plaintiffs/Counterclaim-Defendants Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited and Syntel, Inc.'s (together, "Syntel") evidentiary objections to the following trial exhibits of Defendants/Counterclaim-Plaint iffs The TriZetto Group, Inc. and Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. (together, "TriZetto") are overruled for substantially the reasons stated by TriZetto: DTX-0256.002; DTX-0258.0009 to.0028; DTX-0275; DTX-0277. It is further ORDERED tha t Syntel's evidentiary objections to the following TriZetto trial exhibits are sustained for substantially the reasons stated by Syntel: DTX-0485; DTX-0490; DTX-0491. It is further ORDERED that for the reasons stated at today's telephonic s tatus conference, the following Syntel trial exhibits are admitted: PTX-199-200; PTX 205; PTX 206; PTX 685. Accordingly, TriZetto's motion in limine No. 6 (Dkt. No. 710) and application maintaining the objections to the transition rebates eviden ce (Dkt. No. 890) are DENIED. It is further ORDERED that by end of today, the parties shall meet and confer on the stipulation to moot Syntel's breach of contract claim regarding transition rebates and shall file a jointly proposed stipulation o f facts. The stipulation may reference the date TriZetto agreed to pay and the date of payment. Assuming TriZetto still wants to proceed, the parties shall submit today the proposed stipulation and any disputes about its precise wording, and the Cour t will rule on them. If TriZetto does not wish to proceed on these terms, it shall file a letter with the Court immediately so stating. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to correct the docket entry at Dkt. No. 864, which incorrectly states that the motion in limine at Dkt. No. 710 was granted. Instead, the docket entry should read "ORDER (Defendants' MIL 6) regarding 710 Motion in Limine." (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/16/2020) (ama)
|
|
Filing
884
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that the Order dated September 30, 2020, granting in part and denying in part Syntel's motion in limine seeking to preclude Mr. Britven's expert testimony is supplemented and modified as follows. It is f urther ORDERED that regarding the draft final jury charge referred to in the joint letter at Dkt. No. 877, the parties shall provide any revised jointly proposed damages instructions by October 16, 2020. As to any remaining instructions, the parti es shall use the substantive excerpt of the preliminary charge as the base document, add any instructions that the parties believe will be necessary in light of the evidence in redline and submit those instructions by October 19, 2020. By October 19, 2020, the parties shall also provide any revised jointly proposed verdict form. The parties are reminded that these submissions should be "joint" and shall attempt to resolve all objections. (And as further set forth herein.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/15/2020) (jca)
|
|
Filing
870
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' request for a bench trial on the equitable defenses is DENIED for substantially the reasons stated in Syntel's October 9, 2020, letter. It is further ORDERED that by October 13, 2020, Syntel and Defendants shall file respective letters, not to exceed three (3) pages, stating their positions on whether damages for avoided costs are available in equity for the New York trade secret misappropriation claim, and if not, what if any impact such a ruling would have on the evidence to be presented at trial. (As further set forth in this Order.) ( Responses due by 10/13/2020) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/9/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
868
ORDER denying 744 Motion in Limine: It is hereby ORDERED that Syntel's motion in limine No. 11 as to the admissibility of the "Facets Data Dictionary Guide" and the "Facets 5.01 Physical Package Document" is DENIED. The su pplemental declaration adequately provides the business record foundation for the admissibility of the two documents pursuant to Rule 803(6)(D). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. No. 744. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/8/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
861
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that by October 8, 2020, at 5:00 p.m., Defendants/Counterclaim- Plaintiffs The TriZetto Group, Inc. and Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., and Plaintiffs/Counterclaim-Defendants Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Li mited and Syntel, Inc. shall provide proposed jury instructions regarding their affirmative defenses, suitable for the preliminary charge. It is further ORDERED that, if there are any remaining objections regarding the parties' trial exhibit s, the parties shall provide by October 12, 2020, at 5:00 p.m., a revised exhibit list, in the form set forth in the Court's Trial Procedures During Covid 19 Pandemic, and shall file a letter identifying remaining evidentiary objections and t he parties respective positions. It is further ORDERED that the parties shall continue to meet and confer on deposition designations and, when the parties have reached an impasse, they shall re-submit the relevant deposition transcripts, marked in accordance with Individual Rule IV.B.2(h). (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/7/2020) (rro)
|
|
Filing
847
ORDER: It is ORDERED that the final pretrial conference scheduled for October 7, 2020, will be held by videoconference using the Court's Skype for Business technology. The parties will receive an e-mail including a link to join the videoconf erence in advance of the conference. The public may dial in to the conference using the following conference call line: 888-363-4749, access code: 558-3333. (Telephone Conference set for 10/7/2020 at 11:30 AM before Judge Lorna G. Schofield.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/5/2020) (rro)
|
|
Filing
845
ORDER denying as moot 698 Motion in Limine; denying as moot 723 Motion in Limine. It is hereby ORDERED that the motions in limine at Dkt. Nos. 698 and 723 are DENIED as moot. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. Nos. 698 and 723. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/1/2020) (rro)
|
|
Filing
843
ORDER: (Plaintiffs' MIL 1) granting in part and denying in part 727 Motion in Limine. For these reasons, it is ORDERED that Syntel's motion in limine No. 1 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Mr. Britven's expert testimony is excluded only with respect to the asserted costs incurred for breach of contract. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motion at Docket No. 727.. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/30/2020) (ks)
|
|
Filing
774
ORDER: WHEREAS, the parties filed an amended final pretrial order (FPTO) at Dkt. No. 770 . The FPTO states that the parties are willing to work together to identify and describe recurring issues in a subsequent joint letter, including identifying an d describing categories of exhibits and objections that may be addressed categorically at or before trial. It is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall file such joint letter as soon as possible and no later than noon on October 1, 2020. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 09/25/2020) (jcs)
|
|
Filing
766
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that by September 25, 2020, Defendants/Counterclaim-Plaintiffs shall file a two-column chart identifying in (i) the left column the testimony they seek to have precluded and (ii) the right column the question not answered on the ground of privilege, including citations to the deposition transcripts. Defendants/Counterclaim-Plaintiffs shall file as exhibits to the chart the relevant transcript pages to the extent not provided as exhibits to the Declaration of Adam Kaufmann at Dkt. No. 709. The filing should be electronically related to Dkt. No. 707 on ECF. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/23/2020) (ama)
|
|
Filing
680
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that a telephonic status conference will be held on September 17, 2020, at 11:00 a.m. (EDT) on the following conference line: Dial-in 888-363-4749, Access code 558-3333. The parties' respective jury consultants, if any, shall join the telephonic status conference. The time of the conference is approximate, but the parties shall be ready to proceed by that time. (Telephone Conference set for 9/17/2020 at 11:00 AM before Judge Lorna G. Schofield.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/16/2020) (jca)
|
|
Filing
668
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 663 Letter Motion to Seal: It is hereby ORDERED that the parties' redaction requests at Dkt. No. 663 are GRANTED in part, as further set forth in this order. ORDERED that by September 14, 2020, the p arties shall file public redacted versions of their responses to the pretrial memoranda of law with redactions as proposed, except for the redactions rejected above. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. No. 663. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/11/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
662
ORDER granting in part 639 Letter Motion to Seal; granting in part 644 Letter Motion to Seal; granting in part 655 Letter Motion to Seal; granting 657 Letter Motion to Seal; granting 658 Letter Motion to Seal. It is hereby ORDERED the parties' redaction requests at Dkt. Nos. 639, 644, 654 and 655 are GRANTED in part. Although "[t]he common law right of public access to judicial documents is firmly rooted in our nations history," this right is not absolute, and cou rts "must balance competing considerations against" the presumption of access. Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 11920 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns., Inc., 435 U .S. 589, 599 (1978) ("[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case."). The proposed redactio ns, except for the following, are narrowly tailored to prevent unauthorized dissemination of sensitive business information: Defendants' proposed redactions to damages figures in their pretrial memorandum of law at Dkt. No. 640 on pages 11, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 24 and 25. It is further ORDERED that by September 11, 2020, Defendants shall re-file a public redacted version of their pretrial memorandum of law that does not redact the damages figures on the pages provided above. It is further ORDERED that by September 11, 2020, Defendants shall file the public redacted version of Syntel's pretrial memorandum of law, including the redactions as proposed in Dkt. No. 656. The parties are reminded that per Individual Rule I.D.3, requests for redactions must be accompanied by both the sealed document with the proposed redactions highlighted and a publicly-filed document with the proposed redactions. It is further ORDERED that the parties requests at Dkt. Nos. 657 and 658 to file their joint sealing requests to their respective responses to the pretrial memoranda of law are GRANTED. The parties shall file the requests by September 10, 2020. For future submissions, joint sealing requests, with the proposed public and sealed versions, must be made on the same date the filings are due. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. Nos. 639, 644, 655, 657 and 658. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/9/2020) (jca)
|
|
Filing
653
ORDER: ORDERED that the parties are advised that jury trials will resume, and the jury trial in this action is in line to proceed the week of October 19, 2020. The parties shall be ready to proceed on 24 hours' notice on or after October 19, 202 0. The final pre-trial conference previously scheduled to take place on October 7, 2020, at 11:30 a.m., will take place telephonically on the following conference call line: 888-363-4749, access code: 558-3333. The time of the conference is approximate, but the parties shall be ready to proceed by that time., ( Telephone Conference set for 10/7/2020 at 11:30 AM before Judge Lorna G. Schofield.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/04/2020) (ama)
|
|
Filing
651
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that by September 4, 2020, Syntel and Defendants shall file letters requesting any proposed redactions to Defendants' and Syntel's pretrial memoranda, respectively, with specific justifications for each categor y of information to be sealed. It is further ORDERED that any future requests to file redacted pre-trial submissions must be made jointly, with each party's proposed sealing highlighted in a different color. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/1/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
622
ORDER re: 615 MOTION to Correct Judgment re: 608 Memorandum & Opinion, filed by Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited, Syntel, Inc. It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs' unopposed motion is GRANTED. The inadvertently omitted references neither alter the original meaning of the Opinion & Order nor correct a legal or factual error. An Amended Opinion and Order will follow separately under seal. A redacted public version of the Amended Opinion and Order will also issue, consistent with the redactions granted by the Order at Dkt. No. 612. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. No. 615. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 4/20/2020) (va)
|
|
Filing
614
ORDER granting 601 Letter Motion to Seal. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' request is GRANTED. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 4/6/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
613
***SELECTED PARTIES*** OPINON AND ORDER: For the reasons above, the Report is adopted in full. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, summary judgment is granted to Defendants on: (1) the br each of contract claim based on the Non-Solicitation Provision and on (2) the tortious interference claims, except as to the five employment agreements. Summary judgment is denied to Defendant on (1) the confidential information claims and (2) Def endants trade secrets counterclaim. Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment is denied, specifically as to: (1) the breach of contract claim based on Transition Rebates and (2) Defendants copyright infringement counterclaim. For clarity, the su rviving claims and counterclaims are: Count I: Breach of Contract, based on Sections 19.01 (Confidentiality) and 23.02 (Transition Rebates), as to Defendant TriZetto; Counts II and III: Tortious Interference, based on the five employment agreement s only, as to both Defendants; Count IV: Misappropriation of Confidential Information, as to both Defendants; Counterclaim Counts I and II: Breach of Contract and Breach of the ImpliedCovenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, as to Plaintiff Syntel M auritius; Counterclaim Counts III and IV: Misappropriation of Trade Secrets, as to bothPlaintiffs; Counterclaim Count V: Unfair Competition, as to both Plaintiffs; Counterclaim Count VI: Tortious Interference, as to both Plaintiffs; Counterclaim VI II: Copyright Infringement, as to both Plaintiffs. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to (1) close Dkt. Nos. 520 and 528 and to (2) docket this Order (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 3/24/2020) (cf) (Main Document 613 replaced on 3/31/2020) (cf). Modified on 3/31/2020 (cf).
|
|
Filing
607
ORDER adopting 588 Report and Recommendations, 520 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., The Trizetto Group, Inc., 528 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius L imited, Syntel, Inc. WHEREAS, Judge Aaron issued a Report and Recommendation (the "Report") on the parties' cross-motions for partial summary judgment on January 27, 2020. It is hereby ORDERED that, for reasons stated in the Opinion & Order, which will follow separately under seal, the Report is adopted in full. The parties' objections either are overruled or deemed waived. It is further ORDERED that, if the parties seek any portion of the Opinion & Orde r to remain under seal, they shall file a letter request specifically justifying each category of information to be sealed, by March 27, 2020. The letter shall attach a copy of the Opinion & Order highlighting any portions the parties seek to be sealed. The parties may either file separate letters or, preferably, a joint letter. If a joint letter, each party's proposed sealing should be highlighted in a different color. The Court will not permit the entire Opinion & Order to b e sealed, but at most only particular lines. If the parties make no letter request, the Opinion & Order will be unsealed by March 30, 2020. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. Nos. 520 and 528. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 3/24/2020) (mro)
|
|
Filing
596
ORDER: Having reviewed the parties' Joint Letters requesting permission to file under seal certain submissions in connection with the parties' cross-motions for partial summary judgment (see ECF Nos. 519, 537, 561, 571, 575 & 587) , it is hereby Ordered that, the parties' applications are GRANTED. Because the parties' filings pre-date the change in the Court's practices regarding filing under seal, the parties shall, no later than February 25, 2020, file in the traditional manner (i.e. in paper form) the full, unredacted versions with the Clerk of Court. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on 2/11/2020) (mro)
|
|
Filing
592
ORDER re: 588 Report and Recommendations. It is hereby ORDERED that the parties are advised that no extensions will be granted for any objections or responses to objections. It is further ORDERED that any objections shall not exceed 10 double-sp aced pages. Any responses shall not exceed 10 double-spaced pages. No exhibits will be permitted, and the parties shall cite, if needed, to the summary judgment record. The responding party to any objections shall send courtesy copies to Chambers. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 1/29/2020) (kv)
|
|
Filing
580
ORDER granting 579 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. Application Granted. So Ordered.. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on 12/20/2019) (js)
|
|
Filing
578
ORDER: It is hereby Ordered that, no later than December 27, 2019, the parties shall submit additional briefing regarding the substantive law to be applied to Plaintiff's claims for intentional interference with contractual relations (Counts II and III of the Amended Complaint). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on 12/16/2019) (kl)
|
|
Filing
471
OPINION AND ORDER: re: 460 LETTER MOTION to Compel Syntel to produce Atos documents addressed to Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron from Gianni Cutri dated 10/16/2018. filed by Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., The Trizetto Group, Inc. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants Letter-Motion is DENIED. So Ordered (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on 11/1/2018) (js)
|
|
Filing
456
OPINION AND ORDER re: 439 MOTION for Sanctions (Public Version), filed by Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., The Trizetto Group, Inc. For the reasons set forth above, Defendants' Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 439) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The parties' earlier cross-motions for sanctions are DENIED. (See ECF No. 361). It is hereby ORDERED, as follows: Within forty-five days of the date of this Opinion and Order, Syntel and/or its counse l shall reimburse Defendants for the reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses that they incurred in connection with (a) preparing their May 22, 2018 Letter-Motion and their June 11, 2018 Letter-Motion, and only that portion of their July 30, 2 018 Motion for Sanctions that related to the production of documents from Mr. Chadha; and (b) preparing for and participating in the court proceedings relating to these submissions. If Syntel and its counsel dispute the reasonableness of Defendant s' fees and expenses with respect to Defendants' identified motions, then Defendants shall submit a fee application to this Court for resolution. Defendants are granted leave to take a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of a Syntel witness, t o be taken no later than November 9, 2018, within the parameters set forth above. Plaintiffs shall pay the attorneys' fees (up to a maximum of $15,000) and reasonable expenses of such deposition no later seven days following the conclusi on of the deposition. Syntel shall produce to Defendants all non-privileged documents from the PCT drive that hit on any of the search terms set forth above. Syntel shall produce the documents on a rolling basis beginning no later than seven days from the date of this Opinion and Order and concluding no later than twenty-one days thereafter. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on 9/19/2018) (kl)
|
|
Filing
324
OPINION AND ORDER: re: 317 LETTER MOTION for Local Rule 37.2 Conference (Public Version) addressed to Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron from Gianni Cutri dated 1/16/2018 filed by Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., The Trizetto Group, Inc., [31 8] LETTER MOTION for Local Rule 37.2 Conference (Public Version) addressed to Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron from Gianni Cutri dated 1/18/2018 filed by Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., The Trizetto Group, Inc. For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that: Defendants' motion to compel Syntel to provide a Rule 30(b)(6) witness or witnesses as to Topics 1 to 5 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Syntel shall provide a witness or witnesses to testify regarding Topics 1 to 5, as modified on pages 4 to 5 of this Opinion and Order. Defendants also have leave to take testimony from Syntel's witness or witnesses regarding the January 18 Questions. Syntel's Rule 30(b)(6) deposition shall be taken as soon as practicab le, but no later than February 16, 2018. Syntel's motion to compel electronic production concerning damages information and information about confidential safeguards is GRANTED. Syntel's motion concerning source code-related information is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. If Syntel wishes to pursue further discovery regarding source code, it must inspect the source code-related information in TriZetto's office in Colorado within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order. At such inspe ction, Defendants are ORDERED to make a knowledgeable employee available to assist Syntel in understanding and querying any information from the TriZetto databases and to electronically produce any such information. In addition, Defendants shall iden tify for Syntel at such inspection the source code-related information that Defendants deem to be relevant. Defendants' motion to compel Syntel to produce a declaration is DENIED. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on 1/30/2018) (ama)
|
|
Filing
214
OPINION AND ORDER re: 191 MOTION to Amend/Correct 50 Answer to Amended Complaint, Counterclaim filed by Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., The Trizetto Group, Inc. For the reasons set forth above, Defendants' motion for lea ve to amend its counterclaims is GRANTED. Defendants shall file the Amended Answer and Counterclaims in its redacted form by September 30, 2016, and shall file the full, unredacted version under seal and placed in the clerk's office. IT IS FURTH ER ORDERED THAT the Parties shall meet and confer regarding the outstanding discovery in this case, and by September 30, 2016, file a joint status report explaining what fact and expert discovery remains and a proposed timeline for its completion. If the Parties disagree on the timeline, the report shall set forth their respective positions. (As further set forth in this Order.) Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. amended answer due 9/30/2016; The Trizetto Group, Inc. amended answer due 9/30/2016. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Ronald L. Ellis on 9/23/2016) (kko)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
