Armuth et al v. Guidant Corporation et al

Filing 12

STIPULATION and ORDER re 11 to Continue Pretrial Deadlines signed by Judge David F. Levi on 11/9/06. (See order for details.)(Kastilahn, A)

Case 2:06-cv-02420-DFL-DAD 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

Document 12

Filed 11/13/2006

Page 1 of 3

Dana N. Gwaltney (SBN 209530) Sara J. Romano (SBN 227467) SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. 333 Bush Street, Suite 600 San Francisco, California 94104-2828 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 415.391.0281 Attorneys for Defendants GUIDANT CORPORATION, GUIDANT SALES CORPORATION, CARDIAC PACEMAKERS, INC., ORIGIN MEDSYSTEMS, INC. and BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARYLOU ARMUTH, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. GUIDANT CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. Case No. 2:06-CV-02420-DFL-DAD STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL DEADLINES

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their designated counsel that the deadline for Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint in this action should be extended. It is further stipulated that the deadline for the parties to submit a joint status report pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) should be extended. Defendants seek to transfer this case to the Multi-District Litigation proceeding established in the United States District Court, District of Minnesota ("MDL court"). Accordingly, the following deadlines will be modified as follows: The deadline for Defendants to file an answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs' complaint shall be as follows: (a) if the case is not remanded to state court, and is transferred to the MDL court, any

response will be due pursuant to a deadline set by the MDL court;

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

113143v1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL DEADLINES 1 CASE NO. 2:06-cv-02420-DFL-DAD

Case 2:06-cv-02420-DFL-DAD 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 DATED: November ___, 2006 DATED: November ___, 2006 (b)

Document 12

Filed 11/13/2006

Page 2 of 3

if the case is not remanded and also is not transferred to the MDL court, any response

will be due thirty (30) days after the decision by the JPML denying transfer to the MDL court; or (c) if the case is remanded, any response will be due thirty (30) days after the remand

decision by this Court. The deadline for the parties to prepare and submit a joint status report shall be as follows: (a) if the case is not remanded to state court, and is transferred to the MDL court, any

joint status report will be due pursuant to a deadline set by the MDL court; or (b) if the case is not remanded and also is not transferred to the MDL court, the joint

status report will be due thirty (30) days after this Court denies remand. All other deadlines will be set pursuant to Federal and local rule. IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Respectfully submitted, SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. By:____________________________________ DANA N. GWALTNEY SARA J. ROMANO Attorneys for Defendants GUIDANT CORPORATION, GUIDANT SALES CORPORATION, CARDIAC PACEMAKERS, INC., BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION and ORIGIN MEDSYSTEMS, INC.

Respectfully submitted, REINER, SIMPSON, TIMMONS, & SLAUGHTER, L.L.P. By:____________________________________ ROBERT G. SIMPSON Attorneys for Plaintiffs

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

113143v1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL DEADLINES 2 CASE NO. 2:06-cv-02420-DFL-DAD

Case 2:06-cv-02420-DFL-DAD 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 Dated: November 9, 2006

Document 12 ORDER

Filed 11/13/2006

Page 3 of 3

Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ David F. Levi_________________ THE HONORABLE DAVID F. LEVI

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

113143v1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL DEADLINES 3 CASE NO. 2:06-cv-02420-DFL-DAD