Epstein Secrets

te process because the litigants and the courts assume that the sole purpose of discovery is to assist trial preparation") (quoting United States v. Anderson, 799 F.2d 1438, 1441 (11'h Cir. 1986; emphasis in original). See also Anderson, 799 F.2d at 1441 ("Historically, discovery materials were not avail

es may be discoverable, negotiations are rarely admissible as evidence at trial. See, e.g., hi re MSTG, Inc., 675 F.3d 1337, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2012); LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computes; Inc., 694 F.3d 51, 78 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (reversing district court for admitting settlement agreement at trial); Apple, Inc. v. Sa

process because the litigants and the courts assume that the sole purpose of discovery is to assist trial preparation.") (quoting United States v. Anderson, 799 F.2d 1438, 1441 (1 1 th Cir. 1986; emphasis in original). See also Anderson, 799 F.2d at 1441 ("Historically, discovery materials were not ava

Inc., No. 2:05cvl W.D. ( N.C. Sept. 12, 2006), 2006 U.S. Dist. (continued...) -5- EFTA00605755 rarely admissible as evidence at trial, see, e.g, LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computes; Inc., 694 F.3d 51, 78 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (reversing district court for admitting settlement agreement at trial); Apple, Inc. v. S

e process because the litigants and the courts assume that the sole purpose of discovery is to assist trial preparation@) (quoting United States v. Anderson, 799 F.2d 1438, 1441 (11t1 Cir. 1986; emphasis in original). See also Anderson, 799 F.2d at 1441 (AHistorically, discovery materials were not avail

mes may be discoverable, negotiations are rarely admissible as evidence at trial. See, e.g., In re MSTG, Inc, 675 F.3d 1337, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2012); LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computer, Inc, 694 F.3d 51, 78 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (reversing district court for admitting settlement agreement at trial); Apple, Inc. v. Sa