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)

Download PDF
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?