In Sprint Communications. Co., L.P. v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, No. 11-2684-JWL (D. Kan. Feb. 23, 2017), a patent infringement matter, the court considered the proper scope of waiver where defendant Comcast waived privilege during discovery. In a related matter pending between the parties in another jurisdiction, the court ruled that if Comcast intended to present trial testimony regarding its patent acquisition policy, it must do so through a non-lawyer who must first sit for a deposition and produce all documents related to such a policy. Although Comcast had previously asserted privilege over this issue, Comcast responded to the court’s ruling by producing previously withheld documents and allowing its Vice President of Strategic Intellectual Property to testify about the company’s strategy to acquire high quality, litigation-grade patents that it could assert defensively. The new documents indicated that Comcast had applied this strategy in anticipation of litigation that could be brought against Comcast by Sprint and others. Sprint argued that this waiver required full disclosure of documents discussing Comcast’s defensive acquisition strategy and the timing of Comcast’s anticipation of litigation against Sprint. The court agreed, holding that fairness requires broad disclosure to prevent a selective and potentially misleading presentation of evidence.