Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc v. Merck & Company Inc. et al

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS
CASE NO. 4:21-CV-05497-HSG
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
SAMUEL LIVERSIDGE, SBN 180578
SLiversidge@gibsondunn.com
SHAUN A. MATHUR, SBN 311029
SMathurr@gibsondunn.com
SARAH M. KUSHNER, SBN 320077
SMKushner@gibsondunn.com
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90071-3197
Telephone: 	213.229.7000
Facsimile: 	213.229.7520
S. CHRISTOPHER WHITTAKER, SBN 283518
CWhittaker@gibsondunn.com
COURTNEY L. SPEARS, SBN 329521
CSpears@gibsondunn.com
3161 Michelson Drive
Irvine, California 92612
Telephone: 949.451.3800
Facsimile: 949.451.4220
Attorneys for Defendants
Merck & Company, Inc., Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC (f/k/a Merck
Sharp & Dohme Corporation), MSP Singapore Company LLC,
Schering-Plough Corporation, and Schering Corporation
[Additional Counsel on Signature Page]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION
KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN,
INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
MERCK & COMPANY, INC.; MERCK SHARP
& DOHME CORPORATION; SCHERING
PLOUGH CORPORATION; SCHERING
CORPORATION; MSP SINGAPORE
COMPANY LLC; GLENMARK
PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.; AND
GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS INC.,
USA,
Defendants.
CASE NO. 4:21-cv-05497-HSG
STIPULATION AND ORDER
REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR
DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS
Case 4:21-cv-05497-HSG Document 163 Filed 09/29/26 Page 1 of 5

2
STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS
CASE NO. 4:21-CV-05497-HSG
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-12, Merck & Company, Inc., Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC (f/k/a
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corporation), MSP Singapore Co. LLC, Schering-Plough Corporation, and
Schering Corporation (“Merck”), along with Plaintiff Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc. (“Kaiser”),
by and through their undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
WHEREAS, the parties previously stipulated that Merck may have 35 pages for its motion to
dismiss Kaiser’s Amended Complaint, Kaiser may have 35 pages for its opposition to Merck’s motion
to dismiss, and Merck may have 25 pages for its reply in support of its motion to dismiss (Dkt. 57);
WHEREAS, the Court granted the parties’ previous stipulation providing that Merck may have
35 pages for its motion to dismiss Kaiser’s Amended Complaint, Kaiser may have 35 pages for its
opposition to Merck’s motion to dismiss, and Merck may have 25 pages for its reply in support of its
motion to dismiss (Dkt. 58);
WHEREAS, the parties previously stipulated that Merck may have 30 pages for its motion to
dismiss Kaiser’s Second Amended Complaint, Kaiser may have 30 pages for its opposition to Merck’s
motion to dismiss; and Merck may have 20 pages for its reply in support of its motion to dismiss (Dkt.
73);
WHEREAS, the Court granted the parties’ previous stipulation providing that Merck may have
30 pages for its motion to dismiss Kaiser’s Second Amended Complaint, Kaiser may have 30 pages
for its opposition to Merck’s motion to dismiss; and Merck may have 20 pages for its reply in support
of its motion to dismiss (Dkt. 74);
WHEREAS, the Court’s September 23, 2026 Minute Entry directed the parties “to meet and
confer and e-file either a stipulation and proposed order regarding page limits for summary judgment
briefing, or an administrative motion regarding page limits if there is no agreement”;
WHEREAS, Good cause exists to grant the parties additional pages for their forthcoming
summary judgment motions because this is a complex antitrust case and the motions are likely to
address numerous issues;
///
///
Case 4:21-cv-05497-HSG Document 163 Filed 09/29/26 Page 2 of 5

3
STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS
CASE NO. 4:21-CV-05497-HSG
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP
NOW, THEREFORE, Kaiser and Merck have agreed to, and respectively submit for approval
by the Court, the following page limits for the parties’ forthcoming motions for summary judgment:
1. 	Each party shall have 35 pages for any motion for summary judgment it may file.
2. 	Each party shall have 35 pages for any opposition to a motion for summary judgment.
3. 	Each party shall have 20 pages for any reply in support of its motion for summary judgment.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED: September 23, 2026 	Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Samuel Liversidge
Samuel Liversidge, Bar No. 180578
Sarah M. Kushner, Bar No. 320077
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071
(213) 229-7000
SLiversidge@gibsondunn.com
SMKushner@gibsondunn.com
S. Christopher Whittaker, SBN 283518
Courtney L. Spears, SBN 329521
GIBSON DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
3161 Michelson Drive
Irvine, California 92612-4412
(949) 451-3800
cwhittaker@gibsondunn.com
cspears@gibsondunn.com
Attorneys for Defendants Merck & Company,
Inc., Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC (f/k/a Merck
Sharp & Dohme Corporation), MSP Singapore
Company LLC, Schering-Plough Corporation,
and Schering Corporation
/s/ Daniel Sasse
Daniel A. Sasse, SBN 236234
Tiffanie L. McDowell, SBN 288946
CROWELL & MORING LLP
3 Park Plaza, 20th Floor,
Irvine, CA 92614
Telephone: 949.263.8400
dsasse@crowell.com
tmcdowell@crowell.com
Kent A. Gardiner (pro hac vice)
Case 4:21-cv-05497-HSG Document 163 Filed 09/29/26 Page 3 of 5

4
STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS
CASE NO. 4:21-CV-05497-HSG
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP
Mark M. Supko (pro hac vice)
CROWELL & MORING LLP
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20004
Telephone: 202.624.2500
vgaluzzo@crowell.com
msupko@crowell.com
Nicholas Dowd (pro hac vice)
CROWELL & MORING LLP
1601 Wewatta Street
Suite 815
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: 720-322-4443
ndowd@crowell.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Kaiser Foundation Health
Plan Inc.
Case 4:21-cv-05497-HSG Document 163 Filed 09/29/26 Page 4 of 5

5
STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS
CASE NO. 4:21-CV-05497-HSG
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP
ECF ATTESTATION
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(h)(3), I attest that the concurrence in the filing of this document
has been obtained from all other signatories.
Dated: September 23, 2026 	/s/ Samuel Liversidge
Samuel Liversidge
* * * * *
ORDER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 9/29/2026 ________________________________
Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
United States District Judge
Case 4:21-cv-05497-HSG Document 163 Filed 09/29/26 Page 5 of 5