Currier v. Stryker Corporation et al

Filing 41

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 07/11/12 ORDERING that the time for defendants Stryker Corporation and Howmedica Osteonics Corp (erroneously sued as Stryker Orthopaedics) to answer, move, or otherwise respond to plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint is EXTENDED to 08/14/12. (Benson, A.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Alicia J. Donahue (SBN 117412)
Amir Nassihi (SBN 235936)
SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P.
One Montgomery, Suite 2700
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants STRYKER CORPORATION
and HOWMEDICA OSTEONICS CORP (erroneously
sued as Stryker Orthopaedics)
William F. Wright (SBN 109470)
Victor X. Bertolani (SBN 146376)
Attorneys At Law
1731 “J” Street, Suite 250
Sacramento, California 95811
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

12
13
14

David A. Valerio (SBN 133568)
Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 4977
Auburn, California 95604
Telephone: [phone]

15
16

Attorneys for Plaintiff
TRAVIS J. CURRIER

17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

18

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

19
20

TRAVIS J. CURRIER, an individual,

21

Plaintiff,

22

v.

24

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND
TIME TO PLEAD OR OTHERWISE
RESPOND

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

25

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

Defendants.

23

26
27
28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER; CASE NO. 2:11-CV-01203-JAM-EFB

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1

Whereas, on May 30, 2012, the parties filed a stipulated request to continue the pretrial

2

scheduling order deadlines, to allow Plaintiff to amend his complaint to include Pfizer as a

3

Defendant.

4

Whereas, on May 31, 2012, this Court entered a stipulation to continue the pretrial

5

scheduling order deadlines, and allowed Plaintiff to amend his complaint as to the parties by July 3,

6

2012, to add additional defendant Pfizer and dismiss as defendants Stryker Corporation and

7

Howmedica Osteonics Corp. as soon as Plaintiff obtained further confirmation that Stryker

8

Corporation and Howmedica Osteonics Corp. were not the manufacturers of the subject device.

9
10

Whereas, on July 3, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint and included Pfizer
as a Defendant, in addition to Defendants Stryker Corporation and Howmedica Osteonics Corp.

11
12

Whereas, Stryker Corporation and Howmedica Osteonics Corp. responses to Plaintiff’s
complaint are currently due on July 17, 2012.1

13

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the undersigned counsel

14

and pursuant to Civil Local Rules 143 and 144 that the time for Defendants STRYKER

15

CORPORATION and HOWMEDICA OSTEONICS CORP (erroneously sued as Stryker

16

Orthopaedics) to answer, move, or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint is

17

extended by 28 days to and including August 14, 2012.

18
19

Dated: July 10, 2012

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

20
21

By: _ /s/_ William F. Wright
WILLIAM F. WRIGHT

22

_

Attorneys for Plaintiff

23
Dated: July 10, 2012

SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P.

24
25

By: ______/s/__Amir Nassihi_ ______
ALICIA J. DONAHUE
AMIR NASSIHI

26
27
28

1

Newly named defendant, Pfizer Inc. is yet to be served with the complaint.
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER; CASE NO. 2:11-CV-01203-JAM-EFB

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

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

1
2
3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

DATED: 7/11/12

/s/ John A. Mendez____
____
JOHN A. MENDEZ
United States District Court Judge

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER; CASE NO. 2:11-CV-01203-JAM-EFB

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com