The Commonwealth of Virginia v. McKesson Corporation et al

Filing 83

ORDER granting 82 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER - MODIFIED PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER filed by McKesson Corporation. Motion Hearing set for 9/20/2013 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Susan Illston. Pretrial Conference set for 11/5/2013 03:30 PM in Courtroom 10, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Susan Illston.. Signed by Judge Susan Illston on 4/30/13. (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/1/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 MELVIN R. GOLDMAN (CA SBN 34097) MGoldman@mofo.com JAMES P. BENNETT (CA SBN 65179) JBennett@mofo.com PAUL FLUM (CA SBN 104424) PaulFlum@mofo.com RYAN HASSANEIN (CA SBN 221146) RHassanein@mofo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415.268.7000 Facsimile: 415.268.7522 Attorneys for Defendants MCKESSON CORPORATION 9 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 14 15 THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, 16 17 18 Case No. CV-11-02782 SI Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND MODIFIED [PROPOSED] PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER v. MCKESSON CORPORATION, ROBERT JAMES, AND GREG STEPHEN YONKO, 19 Defendants. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND MODIFIED [PROPOSED] PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER CASE NO. CV-11-02782 SI sf-3276875 1 Plaintiff Commonwealth of Virginia and Defendant McKesson Corporation (collectively 2 the “Parties”), stipulate and request the following modification to the Pretrial Preparation Order: 3 WHEREAS, on April 17, 2013, the Court held a Case Management Conference, continued 4 the trial of this action from October 28, 2013 to November 18, 2013, and asked the Parties to 5 submit a revised scheduling order continuing the other case deadlines to conform to the new trial 6 date; and 7 WHEREAS, pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, the Parties state that the previous time 8 modifications in this action include the August 2, 2011 order rescheduling the initial case 9 management conference to September 22, 2011 (see Docket No. 15); the August 15, 2011 10 stipulation to modify the briefing schedule for Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (see Docket No. 17); 11 the September 14, 2011 order rescheduling the initial case management conference to October 14, 12 2011 (see Docket No. 22); the March 30, 2012 order rescheduling a case management conference 13 for April 6, 2012 (see Docket No. 36); the May 31, 2012 order continuing a case management 14 conference to August 24, 2012 (see Docket No. 41); the August 29, 2012 stipulation and 15 modification of the Pretrial Preparation Order (see Docket No. 45); the December 14, 2012 order 16 rescheduling the case management conference to December 18, 2012 (see Docket No. 49); and the 17 January 2, 2013 stipulation and modification of the Pretrial Preparation Order (see Docket No. 52). 18 NOW THEREFORE, SUBJECT TO COURT APPROVAL, THE PARTIES HEREBY 19 STIPULATE AND AGREE that the schedule set forth in the Court’s Modified Pretrial Preparation 20 Order, entered on January 2, 2013, should be modified by extending all relevant deadlines by 21 approximately three weeks, as follows: 22 FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE: August 16, 2013 at 3 p.m. 23 NON-EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF: June 17, 2013. 24 DESIGNATION OF EXPERTS: June 24, 2013; REBUTTAL: July 15, 2013; RESPONSE 25 TO REBUTTAL: July 26, 2013. 26 Parties SHALL conform to Rule 26(a)(2). 27 EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF: August 9, 2013. 28 STIPULATION AND MODIFIED [PROPOSED] PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER 1 CASE NO. CV-11-02782 SI sf-3276875 1 DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS SHALL be filed by August 16, 2013; Opposition Due August 2 30, 2013; Reply Due September 6, 2013; and set for hearing September 20, 2013, or a date and 3 time convenient for the Court. 4 Defendants may file two motions for summary judgment: (1) an early motion on statute of 5 limitations issues, to be filed before and noticed for hearing after the February 27, 2013 Mediation; 6 and (2) a second motion after the close of discovery, to be briefed and heard on the schedule set 7 forth above. 8 9 5 PRETRIAL CONFERENCE DATE: November 4, 2013, or a date and time convenient for the Court. 10 JURY TRIAL DATE: November 18, 2013, at 8:30 AM., Courtroom 10, 19th floor. 11 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 12 DATED: April 26, 2013 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP MELVIN R. GOLDMAN JAMES P. BENNETT PAUL FLUM MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415.268.7000 Facsimile: 415.268.7522 MGoldman@mofo.com JBennett@mofo.com PaulFlum@mofo.com 13 14 15 16 17 18 By: 19 20 Attorneys for Defendant MCKESSON CORPORATION 21 22 /s/ Paul Flum PAUL FLUM DATED: April 26, 2013 23 HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP By: 24 25 26 27 28 /s/ Steve W. Berman STEVE W. BERMAN Steve W. Berman (pro hac vice) Barbara A. Mahoney (pro hac vice) HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-7292 Facsimile: (206) 623-0594 Email: steve@hbsslaw.com STIPULATION AND MODIFIED [PROPOSED] PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER 2 CASE NO. CV-11-02782 SI sf-3276875 1 Email: barbaram@hbsslaw.com 2 JEFF D. FRIEDMAN 715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202 Berkeley, CA 94710 Telephone: (510) 725-3000 Facsimile: (510) 725-3001 Email: jefff@hbsslaw.com 3 4 5 Lelia P. Winget-Hernandez (pro hac vice) Assistant Attorney General VIRGINIA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 900 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Telephone: (804) 786-1584 Facsimile: (804) 786-0807 LWinget-Hernandez@oag.state.va.us 6 7 8 9 10 Counsel for the Commonwealth of Virginia 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND MODIFIED [PROPOSED] PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER 3 CASE NO. CV-11-02782 SI sf-3276875 [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 2 3 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated:______________________ 11/30/13 4 ________________________________ 5 HON. SUSAN ILLSTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND MODIFIED [PROPOSED] PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER 4 CASE NO. CV-11-02782 SI sf-3276875

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?