Synthes, Inc. et al v. Knapp
Filing
49
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 2/12/15: If the Court denies the 46 Motion, then fact discovery will be extended until sixty days from the date of that Order; or if the Court grants the Motion, then fact discovery will be extended until eighty days from the date of that Order. (Kaminski, H)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
BLANK ROME LLP
Howard M. Knee (SBN 55048)
2029 Century Park East, 6th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: 424.239.3400
Facsimile: 424.239.3434
BLANK ROME LLP
Anthony Haller (admitted pro hac vice)
Scott F. Cooper (admitted pro hac vice)
Andrew B. Cohen (admitted pro hac vice)
One Logan Square
130 North 18th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: 215.569.5690
Facsimile: 215.832.5690
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Synthes, Inc. and
DePuy Synthes Sales, Inc.
SEGAL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
John T. Kinn (SBN 130270)
400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2550
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: 916.441.0886
17
THE MCSHEA LAW FIRM
John P. McShea (admitted pro hac vice)
1500 Market Street
Center Square, Suite 4000
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Telephone: 215.599.0800
Facsimile: 215.599.0888
18
Attorneys for Defendant Gregory Knapp
14
15
16
19
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
20
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
21
22
23
24
25
26
SYNTHES, INC. AND DEPUY SYNTHES
SALES, INC.,
Plaintiffs / Counterclaim-Defendants,
vs.
Case No. 2:13-cv-02261-MCE-DAD
STIPULATED ORDER
AMENDING PRETRIAL
SCHEDULING ORDER
GREGORY KNAPP,
Defendant / Counterclaim-Plaintiff.
27
28
STIPULATED ORDER AMENDING PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER
090725.02356/12480970V.4
1
WHEREAS, on September 4, 2014, the Court entered a Pretrial Scheduling
2
Order (the “Scheduling Order”), scheduling a fact discovery deadline of April 22,
3
2015 (ECF No. 41);
4
WHEREAS, on January 29, 2015, DePuy Synthes filed its Motion to Compel
5
Production of Documents from Third-Party K2M, Inc. (the “Motion”), which is
6
noticed to be heard on February 20, 2015. (ECF No. 46);
7
WHEREAS, on February 3, 2015, all parties and third-party K2M met and
8
conferred regarding rescheduling depositions in this matter until after resolution of
9
DePuy Synthes’ Motion;
10
11
12
13
14
WHEREAS this is the first request for an extension of any deadlines in the
Scheduling Order;
WHEREAS, the parties’ request for an extension of the fact discovery deadline
will not affect any other deadlines in the Scheduling Order;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties STIPULATE and AGREE to amend the
15
Order to extend the deadline for fact discovery as follows: (i) if the Court denies the
16
Motion, then fact discovery will be extended until sixty days from the date of that
17
Order; or (ii) if the Court grants the Motion, then fact discovery will be extended until
18
eighty days1 from the date of that Order. If any party or non-party objects to or seeks
19
reconsideration of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations pursuant to
20
Local Rules 303 or 304, then these deadlines will be tolled until such objections or
21
requests for reconsideration are resolved.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
The additional twenty (20) days of discovery corresponds to the amount of time that would be afforded to
K2M, Inc. if the Court grants the relief requested in the proposed order accompanying DePuy Synthes’ Motion. (ECF
No. 46-1)
090725.02356/12480970v.4
2
PROPOSED STIPULATED ORDER AMENDING PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER
IT IS SO STIPULATED:
1
2
3
BLANK ROME LLP
SEGAL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
4
By:
By:
5
6
7
8
9
/s/ Scott F. Cooper
Anthony B. Haller
Howard M. Knee
Scott F. Cooper
Andrew B. Cohen
THE MCSHEA LAW FIRM
By:
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Synthes, Inc. and
DePuy Synthes Sales, Inc.
12
13
/s/ John P. McShea
John P. McShea
Attorneys for Defendant Gregory Knapp
10
11
/s/ John T. Kinn
John T. Kinn
IT IS SO ORDERED:
DATED: FEBRUARY 12, 2015
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
090725.02356/12480970v.4
2
PROPOSED STIPULATED ORDER AMENDING PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?