Tremblay et al v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc.
Filing
24
ORDER GRANTING 23 MOTION to Substitute Attorney. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 6/6/13. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/6/2013)
Case3:13-cv-00231-JSW Document23-1 Filed05/30/13 Page1 of 2
1 ALLEN RUBY (SBN 47109)
Allen.Ruby@skadden.com
2 SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER &
FLOM LLP
3 525 University Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
4 Telephone: (650) 470-4500
5
Facsimile: (650) 470-4570
STEPHEN J. HARBERG (pro hac application pending)
6 Stephen.harburg@skadden.com
JESSICA D. MILLER (pro hac application pending)
7 Jessica.miller@skadden.com
SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER &
8 FLOM LLP
1440 New York Avenue, N.W.
9 Washington, D.C. 20005
Telephone:(202) 371.7000
10 Facsimile (202) 393.5760
11 Attorneys for Defendant
12
INTUITIVE SURGICAL, INC.
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
16 KATHLEEN TREMBLAY, et al,
17
18
Plaintiff,
v.
19 INTUITIVE SURGICAL, INC.,
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Defendant.
) Case No.: 12-CV-00231-JSW
)
)
) [PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING
) SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL
)
)
)
)
)
Case3:13-cv-00231-JSW Document23-1 Filed05/30/13 Page2 of 2
1
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD:
2
Defendant Intuitive Surgical, Inc. seeks an order permitting substitution of the following
3 attorneys in place of Mark Cheffo: Stephen J. Harberg and Jessica D. Miller of the law firm
4 Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, located at 1440 New York Avenue, N.W.,
5 Washington, D.C. 20005, in Tremblay v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-00231-JSW.
6
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 11-5, the Court approves the substitution of counsel sought by
7 Defendant Intuitive Surgical, Inc.
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
9
June 6
Dated: __________, 2013
10
______________________________________________
HONORABLE JEFFREY S. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL
1
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?