CYMA (U.S.A.) LTD. et al v. Lumondi, Inc. et al

Filing 56

STIPULATION AND ORDER: Final Pretrial Conference reset for 8/24/2011 02:30 PM in Courtroom 15, 18th Floor, San Francisco; Jury Trial reset for 10/25/2011 08:30 AM in Courtroom 15, 18th Floor, San Francisco; Signed by Judge Marilyn Hall Patel on 8/6/2010. (awb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/9/2010)

Download PDF
CYMA (U.S.A.) LTD. et al v. Lumondi, Inc. et al Doc. 56 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 STEVEN N. WILLIAMS (Cal. SBN 175489) swilliams@cpmlegal.com ARON K. LIANG (Cal. SBN 228936) aliang@cpmlegal.com COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY San Francisco Airport Office Center 840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200 Burlingame, California 94010 Telephone: (650) 697-6000 Facsimile: (650) 697-0577 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants Cyma (U.S.A.) Ltd. and Cyma S.A. TAD A. DEVLIN (Cal. SBN 190355) tdevlin@gordonrees.com DOUGLAS A. SCULLION (Cal. SBN 215339) dscullion@gordonrees.com GORDON & REES LLP 275 Battery St., 20th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 986-5900 Facsimile: (415) 986-8054 Attorneys for Defendants and Counter-Claimants Lumondi, Inc. and Mondaine Watch, Ltd. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION CYMA (U.S.A.) LTD. and CYMA S.A., ) ) Plaintiff, ) vs. ) ) LUMONDI, INC., and MONDAINE ) WATCH, LTD. ) ) Defendants. ) ___________________________________ ) ) LUMONDI, INC., and MONDAINE ) WATCH, LTD. ) ) Counter-Claimants, ) vs. ) ) CYMA (U.S.A.) LTD., CYMA, S.A. and ) ROES 1-10 ) ) Counterdefendants. ) ___________________________________ ) Case No. 09-cv-02802 (MHP) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CONTINUATION OF TRIAL DATES 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 v L A W O F F IC E S 28 S T I P U L A T I O N AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CONTINUATION OF TRIAL DATES; Case No. CV 09 2802 (M H P ) COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 WHEREFORE, a settlement conference is currently scheduled before Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Laporte in the Northern District of California. Settlement discussions are on-going between the Plaintiffs Cyma (U.S.A.) Ltd. and Cyma S.A., on the one side, and Defendants Lumondi, Inc. and Mondaine Watch Ltd. on the other. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated and agreed by the respective parties, by and through their counsel of record: The parties propose the following revised schedule: Witness Lists (case in chief): Fact Discovery Cut-off: Expert Designation: Rebuttal Expert Designation: Expert Discovery Cut-off: Dispositive Motions Deadline: Dispositive Motions Hearing: Pretrial Conference: Trial: December 17, 2010 January 28, 2011 February 25, 2011 March 25, 2011 April 29, 2011 20 June 17, 2011 25 July 22, 2011 @ 2:00 p.m. 24 August 26, 2011 @ 2:30 p.m. October 25, 2011 @ 8:30 a.m. Dated: August 5, 2010 COTCHETT PITRE & McCARTHY /s Aron K. Liang STEVEN N. WILLIAMS ARON K. LIANG Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counterdefendants Cyma (U.S.A.) Ltd. and Cyma S.A. Dated: August 5, 2010 24 25 26 27 GORDON & REES LLP /s Tad A. Devlin TAD A. DEVLIN DOUGLAS SCULLION Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaimants Lumondi, Inc. and Mondaine Watch Ltd. v L A W O F F IC E S 28 S T I P U L A T I O N AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CONTINUATION OF TRIAL DATES; Case No. CV 09 2802 (M H P ) COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY 1 1 The Court hereby enters an order in conformance with the above stipulation: 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 UNIT ED HON. MARILYN HALL PATEL United States District Court Judge S 8/6 Dated: _____________, 2010 S DISTRICT TE C _____________________T______________________ _A ER N F D IS T IC T O R v L A W O F F IC E S 28 S T I P U L A T I O N AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CONTINUATION OF TRIAL DATES; Case No. CV 09 2802 (M H P ) COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY A C LI 2 FO ari Judge M lyn H. P atel R NIA O ORD IT IS S ERED RT U O NO RT H

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?