Currier v. Stryker Corporation et al

Filing 38

STIPULATION and ORDER 37 signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 5/31/12 ORDERING Plaintiff shall have until July 3, 2012 to amend his Second Amended Complaint as to the Parties as described in this Stipulation; All dispositive motions shall be filed by June 26, 2013; Hearing on such [dispositive] motions shall be on July 24, 2013 at 9:30 a.m.; All discovery shall be completed by May 7, 2013; The parties shall make expert witness disclosures by March 12, 2013; Supplemental disclosure and disclosure of any rebuttal experts shall be made by March 26, 2013; The final pre-trial conference be set for August 28, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.; and Jury trial in this matter be set for September 30, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. In addition, Parties respectfully request that any settlement conference be set for after April 1, 2013.(Matson, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Alicia J. Donahue (SBN 117412)
[e-mail]
Amir Nassihi (SBN 235936)
[e-mail]
SHOOK, HARDY & BACON, LLP
One Montgomery, Suite 2700
San Francisco, CA 94104
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
STRYKER CORPORATION and
HOWMEDICA OSTEONICS CORP
(erroneously sued herein as Stryker Orthopaedics)

8
9
10
11
12
13
14

William F. Wright (SBN 109470)
[e-mail]
VICTOR X. BERTOLANI (SBN 146376)
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1731 “J” Street, Suite 250
Sacramento, California 95811
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
TRAVIS J. CURRIER

15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
SACRAMENTO DIVISION
18
TRAVIS J. CURRIER, an individual,

Case No. 2:11-cv-01203-JAM-EFB

19
Plaintiff,
20
v.
21
22
23
24

STRYKER CORPORATION; STRYKER
SALES CORPORATION; HOWMEDICA
OSTEONICS CORP, dba STRYKER
ORTHOPAEDICS; and Does 1-20,

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR LEAVE
TO AMEND SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT AND CONTINUE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER
DEADLINES
(AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT)

Defendants.

25
26
27

THE PARTIES RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING STIPULATED
REQUEST, through their respective attorneys of record, as follows:

28
1
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO AMEND SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND CONTINUE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER DEADLINES
232154 V1
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1

1.

On August 1, 2011, this Court issued its Pre-trial Scheduling Order addressing

2

amendments to the pleadings and setting a schedule for this case, including expert disclosures on

3

July 13, 2012, and trial on January 28, 2013.

4

2.

At that time, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint

5

was set for hearing on September 7, 2011. On October 13, 2011, this Court granted Defendants’

6

Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. Plaintiff subsequently filed his Second

7

Amended Complaint and Defendants moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint on

8

November 23, 2011.

9
10

3.

On March 27, 2012, this Court denied Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and directed

Defendants to file the Answers by April 16, 2012.

11

4.

On April 16, 2012, Defendants filed their Answers and this case first became at issue.

12

5.

Parties’ Initial Disclosures were due two weeks after this case became at issue and

13
14

Parties timely exchanged initial disclosures, receiving each others’ disclosures in early May 2012.
6.

Based on these events and intervening discussions, Defendants have informed

15

Plaintiff that the current Defendants were not the manufacturers, designers, or distributors of the

16

femoral stem implanted into Plaintiff, and that Pfizer Inc. is the proper defendant.

17

7.

As such, Plaintiff needs to amend his complaint to add Defendant Pfizer Inc. into the

18

action. If Defendants' contentions are confirmed in discovery, Plaintiff will dismiss some or all of

19

the currently named Defendants.

20

8.

Pfizer Inc., in turn, would need adequate time to conduct discovery and prepare

21

experts. Plaintiff also would need additional time to conduct discovery and prepare his case against

22

Pfizer Inc.

23
24
25

9.

As such, Parties hereby stipulate and respectfully request that this Court consider the

foregoing as good cause to amend the existing Pre-trial Scheduling Order.
10.

Parties propose that the current Pre-trial Scheduling Order be vacated to allow

26

Plaintiff to amend his Second Amended Complaint by July 3, 2012, and that a new Scheduling

27

Conference be set for September 2012.

28

2
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO AMEND SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND CONTINUE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER DEADLINES

232154 V1
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1
2
3
4

11.

Amended as follows:
12.

It is respectfully requested that the Court, in its discretion, continue all Pre-Trial

Scheduling Order deadlines by eight (8) months to the following:

5
6

In the alternative, Parties respectfully request that the Pre-trial Scheduling Order be

a.) Plaintiff shall have until July 3, 2012 to amend his Second Amended Complaint
as to the Parties as described in this Stipulation;

7

b.) All dispositive motions shall be filed by June 26, 2013;

8

c.) Hearing on such [dispositive] motions shall be on July 24, 2013 at 9:30 a.m.;

9

d.) All discovery shall be completed by May 7, 2013;
e.) The parties shall make expert witness disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)

10

by March 12, 2013;

11

f.) Supplemental disclosure and disclosure of any rebuttal experts under Fed. R. Civ.

12

P. 26(a)(2)(c) shall be made by March 26, 2013;

13
14

g.) The final pre-trial conference be set for August 28, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.; and

15

h.) Jury trial in this matter be set for September 30, 2013 at 9:00 a.m.

16
17

13.

In addition, Parties respectfully request that any settlement conference be set for after

April 1, 2013.

18
19
20
21

Dated: May 30, 2012

By: /s/ Victor X. Bertolani______________
WILLIAM F. WRIGHT
VICTOR X. BERTOLANI

22

Attorneys for Plaintiff TRAVIS J.
CURRIER

23
24
25
26
27
28

3
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO AMEND SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND CONTINUE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER DEADLINES

232154 V1
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1

Dated: May 30, 2012

2

By: /s/ Amir Nassihi___________________
ALICIA J. DONAHUE
AMIR NASSIHI

3

Attorneys for Defendants STRYKER
CORPORATION AND HOWMEDICA
OSTEONICS CORP (erroneously sued
as Stryker Orthopaedics)

4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED (AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT).

7
8

DATED: May 31, 2012

9
10
11

/s/ John A. Mendez___________________
U. S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO AMEND SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND CONTINUE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER DEADLINES

232154 V1
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com