NanoEn Tek, Inc. et al v. Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.

Filing 80

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 79 CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 5/21/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/21/2012)

Download PDF
Case3:11-cv-06237-JSW Document79 Filed05/18/12 Page1 of 4 1 2 3 Clinton J. McCord, SBN 204749; cmccord@edwardswildman.com EDWARDS WILDMAN PALMER LLP 9665 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone No.: 310-860-8700 Fax No.: 310-860-3800 4 5 Attorneys for Plaintiff NANOENTEK, INC. (Additional Attorneys listed on signature page) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 RONALD F. LOPEZ, SBN 111756; rflopez@nixonpeabody.com NIXON PEABODY One Embarcadero Center, 18th Floor San Francisco, California 94111-3600 Telephone: (415) 984-8200 Facsimile: (415) 984-8300 ROBERT E. KREBS, SBN 057526; rkrebs@nixonpeabody.com JENNIFER HAYES, SBN 241533; jenhayes@nixonpeabody.com NIXON PEABODY LLP 2 Palo Alto Square 3000 El Camino Real, Suite 500 Palo Alto, California 94306 Telephone: (650) 320-7700 Facsimile: (650) 320-7701 14 Attorneys for Defendant BIO-RAD LABORATORIES, INC. 15 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 NANOENTEK, INC., 19 20 21 22 Plaintiff, Case No. 3:11-CV-06237 JSW JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE vs. The Honorable Jeffrey S. White BIO-RAD LABORATORIES, INC., Defendant. 23 24 25 WHEREAS, Plaintiff NanoEnTek, Inc. (“NanoEnTek”) and Defendant Bio-Rad 26 Laboratories, Inc. (“Bio-Rad”), by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby 27 STIPULATE AND AGREE, to consent to have Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero conduct any 28 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE 3:11-CV-06237-JSW Case3:11-cv-06237-JSW Document79 Filed05/18/12 Page2 of 4 1 and all further proceedings in the case, including trial, and order the entry of a final judgment. 2 Appeal from the judgment shall be taken directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the 3 Federal Circuit. 4 5 6 DATED: May 18, 2012 Respectfully submitted, EDWARDS WILDMAN PALMER LLP 7 ____/s/ Adam Samansky__________________ Clinton J. McCord, SBN 204749 George W. Neuner (admitted pro hac vice) gneuner@edwardswildman.com David Cotta (admitted pro hac vice) dcotta@edwardswildman.com Adam Samansky (admitted pro hac vice) asamansky@edwardswildman.com Peter Cuomo (admitted pro hac vice) pcuomo@edwardswildman.com Deborah Higashi Dodge (admitted pro hac vice) ddodge@edwardswildman.com EDWARDS WILDMAN PALMER LLP 111 Huntington Avenue Boston, MA 02199-7613 Telephone No.: 617-239-0100 Fax No.: 617-227-4420 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Attorneys for Plaintiff NANOENTEK, INC. 17 18 19 DATED: May 18, 2012 NIXON PEABODY LLP ___/s/ Jennifer Hayes___________________ Ronald F. Lopez, SBN 111756 One Embarcadero Center, 18th Floor San Francisco, California 94111-3600 Telephone: (415) 984-8200 Facsimile: (415) 984-8300 20 21 22 23 Robert E. Krebs SBN 057526 Jennifer Hayes SBN 241533 2 Palo Alto Square 3000 El Camino Real, Suite 500 Palo Alto, California 94306 Telephone: (650) 320-7700 Facsimile: (650) 320-7701 24 25 26 27 Attorneys for Defendant BIO-RAD LABORATORIES, INC. 28 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE -2- 3:11-CV-06237-JSW Case3:11-cv-06237-JSW Document79 Filed05/18/12 Page3 of 4 1 2 3 FILER’S ATTESTATION Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X, Subparagraph B, the undersigned attests that all parties have concurred in the filing of this JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 4 ORDER. 5 6 DATED: May 18, 2012 /s/ Jennifer Hayes Jennifer Hayes 7 8 Pursuant to Northern District Civil Local Rule 73-1(b) and the parties’consent, this matter is HEREBY REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Spero for all further proceedings 9 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 11 DATED: May 21, 2012 Jeffrey S. White United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE -3- 3:11-CV-06237-JSW

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?