Bookhamer et al v. Sunbeam Products, Inc.
Filing
317
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 316 to Remove Incorrectly Filed Document filed by Charles Thomas Martin, Jr., Anthony Bookhamer, Carl DiSilvestro, Lena J. Tryon. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 2/8/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/8/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
MARY E. ALEXANDER, ESQ. (SBN: 104173)
JENNIFER L. FIORE, ESQ. (SBN: 203618)
SOPHIA M. ASLAMI, ESQ. (SBN: 262712)
Mary Alexander & Associates, P.C.
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1303
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 433-4440
Facsimile: (415) 433-5440
Email: malexander@maryalexanderlaw.com
jfiore@maryalexanderlaw.com
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
8
13
S. MARK VARNEY - 121129
GARRETT SANDERSON, III – 131026
Carroll, Burdick & McDonough, LLP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 400
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 989-5900
Facsimile: (415) 989-0932
Email: gsanderson@cbmlaw.com
14
Attorneys for Defendant
9
10
11
12
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
18
22
ANTHONY BOOKHAMER, a minor, by
and through his Guardian ad Litem, LENA
J. TRYON; LENA J. TRYON, as Personal
Representative of the Estate of Victoria
DiSilvestro; CHARLES THOMAS
MARTIN, JR.; CARL DISILVESTRO, a
minor, by and through his Guardian ad
Litem, MARY DISILVESTRO,
23
Plaintiffs,
24
v.
25
SUNBEAM PRODUCTS, INC.,
26
Defendant.
19
20
21
27
28
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 09-CV-06027 EMC (DMR)
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO REMOVE INCORRECTLY
FILED DOCUMENT
Pretrial Conf. Date: January 22, 2013
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Courtroom: 5, 17th Floor
Honorable Edward M. Chen
Trial: Vacated
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMOVE INCORRECTLY FILED DOCUMENT
1
The parties hereby stipulate, by and through their attorneys of record, that Exhibit 2 to
2
Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Sunbeam’s Motion in Limine No. 6 and Exhibit 6 to Plaintiffs’ Notice of
3
Manual Filing of Hard Copies, should be removed from the public filings because they contain
4
confidential information regarding Sunbeam Products, Inc.
5
6
The confidential information is the deposition transcript of William M. Rowe, Jr. in the
Wilkinson v. Sunbeam matter.
7
On Friday, January 11, 2013, Plaintiffs inadvertently gave the confidential exhibit, Docket
8
Number 237-2, to Sunbeam for filing. Sunbeam filed it, but this was not Sunbeam’s error. The
9
parties had agreed that the moving papers and oppositions to each motion in limine would be filed
10
by the moving party. Plaintiffs stipulate that Sunbeam is not to blame for this and the error was
11
entirely Plaintiffs’.
The parties, therefore, stipulate that the Court can permanently remove Exhibit 2 to
12
13
Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Sunbeam’s Motion in Limine No. 6, Docket Number 237-2 from the
14
public file and the ECF/Pacer website, as well as the Exhibit 6 to Plaintiffs’ Notice of Manual
15
Filing of hard Copies.
16
17
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED: February 4, 2013
MARY ALEXANDER & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
18
19
By:
20
21
George E. McLaughlin, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
22
23
/s/ Mary E. Alexander
Mary E. Alexander, Esq.
Jennifer L. Fiore, Esq.
DATED: February 4, 2013
CARROLL, BURDICK & MCDONOUGH, LLP
24
By:
25
26
27
/s/ S. Mark Varney
S. Mark Varney, Esq.
Garrett Sanderson, III, Esq.
Attorneys for Defendant
///
28
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMOVE INCORRECTLY FILED DOCUMENT
1
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
2
Exhibit 2 to Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Sunbeam’s Motion in Limine No. 6, Docket Number
3
237-2, and Exhibit 6 to Plaintiffs’ Notice of Manual Filing of Hard Copies shall be permanently
4
removed from the public file and ECF/Pacer website.
5
ISTRIC
ES D
T
RT
11
dward
Judge E
NO
10
ER
n
M. Che
A
H
12
R NIA
9
D
RDERE
OO
IT IS S
LI
8
UNIT
ED
7
RT
U
O
T
C
______________________________________________
TA
THE HONORABLE EDWARD M. CHEN
FO
2/8
DATED: ____________, 2013
S
6
N
13
D IS T IC T
R
OF
C
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMOVE INCORRECTLY FILED DOCUMENT
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?