CHURCH & DWIGHT CO., INC. v. MAYER LABORATORIES, INC.

Filing 252

ORDER EXTENDING PRETRIAL FILING DEADLINE TO 3/13/12 AND APPROVING TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE ON 3/9/12 re 251 Joint Case Management Statement filed by Mayer Laboratories, Inc., Church & Dwight Co., Inc.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/6/12. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/6/2012)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
____________________________________
:
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
:
MAYER LABORATORIES, INC.,
:
:
Defendant.
:
____________________________________:
CHURCH & DWIGHT CO., INC.,

CIVIL ACTION
No.: CV10-04429 EMC
ORDER

____________________________
UPDATED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
AND JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
____________________________
In accordance with the request of the Court, Plaintiff Church & Dwight, Inc. (“Church &
Dwight”) and Defendant Mayer Labs, Inc. (“Mayer Labs”) hereby respectfully submit this
Updated Joint Case Management Statement and Joint Motion for Extension of Time for purposes
of the status conference with the Court on Friday, March 9, 2012. Specifically, the parties agree
that the Status Conference should remain as scheduled, but respectfully request that it be held via
teleconference. In addition, the parties respectfully request that the due dates for filing the joint
pretrial conference statement and pretrial materials, as set forth in the Court’s Second Amended
Case Management and Pretrial Order for Jury Trial and Order Re Discovery, be extended one
week from March 6, 2012 to March 13, 2012.
Current Status of the Case and Reasons for Extension
On March 1, 2012, the Court decided many of the pending claims in this case in its
decision granting in part and denying in part Church & Dwight’s summary judgment motion.

Since that decision, the parties have been discussing a possible resolution of the remaining open
counts in Church & Dwight’s complaint and in Mayer Labs’ counterclaims. Church & Dwight is
willing to enter into a Stipulation, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41, whereby both
parties would agree to voluntarily dismiss with prejudice all remaining claims/counterclaims, and
have a final judgment entered and the case closed. Mayer Labs is likewise willing to enter into a
Stipulation pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41, dismissing with prejudice all
remaining open claims and counterclaims, but wishes to preserve its right to file a motion for
reconsideration of the Court’s March 1, 2012 Order. The parties disagree as to whether Mayer
Labs’ motion for sanctions would be moot in light of such a Stipulation.
Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that the Court grant the additional time.

Date: March 6, 2012

Respectfully submitted,

_s/Carl W. Hittinger_____________________
Carl W. Hittinger (pro hac)
Lesli C. Esposito (pro hac)
Jarod M. Bona (CA 234327)
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
1650 Market Street, Suite 4900
Philadelphia, PA 19103
T: [phone]
F: [phone]

_s/Neil S. Cartusciello_________________
Neil S. Cartusciello (pro hac)
CARTUSCIELLO & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
104 Mountainside Road
Mendham, NJ 07945
T: [phone]
F: [phone]
Paul F. Novak (pro hac)
Gary S. Snitow (pro hac)
Peter Safirstein (pro hac)
Peggy Wedgworth (pro hac)
MILBERG LLP
One Kennedy Square
777 Woodward Ave, Suite 890
Detroit, Michigan 4822

Attorneys for Plaintiff Church & Dwight

R NIA

D

ORDERE

en

RT

A

H

ER

FO

Ch
ward M.
Judge Ed

LI

UNIT
ED

IT IS SO

NO

___________________
Edward M. Chen
U.S. District Judge___

Attorneys for Defendant Mayer Labs

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

S

IT IS SO ORDERED that the pretrial
filing shall be filed by 3/13/12. The
3/6/12 status conference shall be held
by telephone. Plaintiff counsel shall
initiate the conference call and call the
court last at [phone].

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

2