Aphena Pharma Solutions - Maryland LLC f/k/a Celeste Contract Packaging, LLC v. BioZone Laboratories, Inc. et al
Filing
74
STIPULATION AND ORDER Selecting ADR Process. Case referred to Private ADR. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 03/04/2013. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/4/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
ADRIENE PLESCIA LYNCH (State Bar No. 259100)
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
333 South Hope Street
Sixteenth Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: (213) 576-1000
Facsimile: (213) 576-1100
Email: adriene.lynch@alston.com
ANDREW BENJAMIN KAY (DC Bar No. 463912) (admitted pro hac vice)
KELLEY CONNOLLY BARNABY (DC Bar No. 998757) (admitted pro hac vice)
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
The Atlantic Building
950 F Street, NW
Washington, DC 20004
Telephone: (202) 239-3300
Facsimile: (202) 239-3333
Email: andrew.kay@alston.com
Email: kelley.barnaby@alston.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
APHENA PHARMA SOLUTIONS –
MARYLAND, LLC
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
16
17
APHENA PHARMA SOLUTIONS MARYLAND, LLC,
Honorable Samuel Conti
Plaintiff,
18
19
20
21
Case No.: 3:12-cv-06292 SC
v.
BIOZONE LABORATORIES, INC., et al.,
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER SELECTING ADR
PROCESS PURSUANT TO CIVIL
L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5
Defendants.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS
LEGAL02/33960754v1
3:12-cv-06292 SC
1
2
3
4
TO THE HONORABLE SAMUEL CONTI:
Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have
reached the following stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5:
The parties agree to participate in the following ADR process:
5
Court Processes:
6
______
Non-binding Arbitration (ADR L.R. 4)
7
______
Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5)
8
______
Mediation (ADR L.R. 6)
9
(Note: Parties who believe that an early settlement conference with a
10
Magistrate Judge is appreciably more likely to meet their needs than any other form
11
of ADR, must participate in an ADR phone conference and may not file this form.
12
They must instead file a Notice of Need for ADR Phone Conference. See Civil Local
13
Rule 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5.)
14
Private Process:
__X__
15
Private ADR (please identify process and provider)
16
The parties have agreed in principle to appear before a private mediator, but
17
have not yet agreed on a particular mediator. The parties are continuing to work
18
together to finalize their agreement and to identify a mediator with availability and the
19
requisite experience.
20
The parties agree to hold the ADR session by:
21
___X__
22
23
the presumptive deadline (The deadline is 90 days from the
date of the order referring the case to an ADR process unless otherwise ordered.)
_____ _
other requested deadline of __________, 2013.
24
25
26
27
28
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS
LEGAL02/33960754v1
3:12-cv-06292 SC
1
Respectfully submitted,
2
3
DATED: March 1, 2013
4
5
ANDREW BENJAMIN KAY
KELLEY CONNOLLY BARNABY
ADRIENE PLESCIA LYNCH
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
6
7
/s/ Adriene Plescia Lynch
Adriene Plescia Lynch
8
Attorney for Plaintiff
Aphena Pharma Solutions-Maryland, LLC
9
10
DATED: March 1, 2013
11
RICHARD WILLIAMS
GRAY DUFFY, LLP
12
13
/s/ Richard Williams
Richard Williams
14
Attorney for Defendant Daniel Fisher
15
16
DATED: March 1, 2013
17
ROBERT WALLACE
WILSON ELSER MOSKOWITZ EDELMAN &
DICKER LLP
18
19
/s/ Robert Wallace
Robert Wallace
20
Attorney for Defendants BioZone Laboratories, Inc.
and BioZone Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
21
[PROPOSED] ORDER
22
23
X
_______ The parties’ stipulation is adopted and IT IS SO ORDERED.
24
_______ The parties’ stipulation is modified as follows, and IT IS SO ORDERED.
RT
Judge S
2
ER
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS
C
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
H
LEGAL02/33960754v1
R NIA
HONORABLEti SAMUEL CONTI
on
amuel C
FO
NO
28
LI
03/04/2013
DATED: _______
A
27
UNIT
ED
26
ISTRIC
ES D
TC
AT
T
RT
U
O
S
25
3:12-cv-06292 SC
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?