GLAXO MOVES TO COMPEL DISCOVERY; IRS MOVES TO COMPEL PRODUCTION.

There are pending before the Court three motions filed by respondent: (1) Motion to Compel Production of Documents Redacted by Petitioner, filed December 30, 2005; (2) Respondent's Motion to Compel Responses to Respondent's Request for Production of Documents No. 1, filed January 9, 2006; and (3) Motion to Compel Production of Documents for Which Petitioner Claims a Privilege, filed January 10, 2006. Although not formally set for hearing, those motions were discussed during the pretrial conference held in Washington, D. C., on January 11, 2006. Because the process through which the parties could reach agreement as to the disputes reflected in respondent's motions and petitioner's responses to those motions has not been completed, the matters were postponed to the next pretrial conference to be held on March 22, 2006.

With respect to one of the disputes between the parties, the Court inquired of respondent's counsel as to the appropriate remedy in the event that petitioner failed to provide the information sought by respondent. Respondent's counsel replied in part: "The remedy would be to prevent Petitioner from contesting our use of other marketing documents as being complete."

Upon due consideration and for cause, it is hereby

ORDERED: That, on or before March 1, 2006, respondent shall serve on petitioner and file with the Court a written response to Petitioner's Motion to Compel Discovery and to Review Responses to Requests for Admissions Regarding Advance Pricing Agreements filed January 24, 2006. It is further

ORDERED: That, on or before March 1, 2006, respondent shall show cause in writing, served on petitioner and filed with the Court, why an appropriate sanction for respondent's refusal to provide the information sought by petitioner's Motion to Compel Discovery and to Review Responses to Requests for Admissions Regarding Advance Pricing Agreements by responses to interrogatories, production of documents, admissions, or stipulation, shall be a deemed admission, for purposes of these cases, of the matters set forth in petitioner's first set of requests for admissions filed January 4, 2006. It is further

ORDERED: That, on or before March 1, 2006, petitioner shall show cause in writing, served on respondent and filed with the Court, as to why respondent's proposed remedy as set forth above should not be imposed in the event that petitioner does not, by further responses to requests for production of documents or by stipulation or by some other method agreed to between the parties, identify as to documents produced in response to respondent's discovery requests, the specific category of documents being produced and the specific requests to which those documents respond. It is further

ORDERED: That (1) respondent's Motion to Compel Production of Documents Redacted by Petitioner, filed December 30, 2005; (2) Respondent's Motion to Compel Responses to Respondent's Request for Production of Documents No. 1, filed January 9, 2006; (3) respondent's Motion to Compel Production of Documents for Which Petitioner Claims a Privilege, filed January 10, 2006; and (4) Petitioner's Motion to Compel Discovery and to Review Responses to Requests for Admissions Regarding Advance Pricing Agreements, filed January 24, 2006, are calendared for hearing at a time and date certain of 10:00 a.m. on March 22, 2006, during the Trial Session of the Court scheduled to commence at 10:00 a.m. on March 20, 2006, Room 206, Jacob K. Javits Federal Building, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, New York. This Order constitutes official notice of its contents to the parties.