Karl Storz Endoscopy-America, Inc. v. Stryker Corporation et al

Filing 66

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 6/17/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/17/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Alfredo A. Bismonte (Cal. Bar. No. 136154)
Kimberly P. Zapata (Cal. Bar. No. 138291)
Jeremy M. Duggan (Cal. Bar No. 229854)
Beck, Bismonte & Finley, LLP
150 Almaden Blvd, 10th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Wesley W. Whitmyer, Jr. (pro hac vice)
Benjamin J. Lehberger (pro hac vice)
Benjamin C. White (pro hac vice)
ST. ONGE STEWARD JOHNSTON & REENS LLC
986 Bedford Street
Stamford, Connecticut 06905
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Karl Storz
Endoscopy-America, Inc.

15

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

16
17

Case No. C 14-00876 RS

18
19

KARL STORZ ENDOSCOPY-AMERICA,
INC.

20
21
22
23
24

Plaintiff,

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER FOR FIRST EXTENSION OF
TIME TO RESPOND TO
DEFENDANT’S AMENDED
COUNTERCLAIMS

v.
Hon. Richard Seeborg
STRYKER CORPORATION, AND
STRYKER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
Defendants.

25
26
27
28

Case No. C 14-00876 RS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT’S
AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS

1

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 6-1(b) and 7-12, Plaintiff Karl Storz Endoscopy-America,

2

Inc. (“KSEA”) and Defendants Stryker Corporation and Stryker Communications, Inc.

3

(collectively “Stryker”), by their respective counsel, hereby stipulate to an extension of time until

4

June 27, 2014 for KSEA to answer or otherwise respond to Stryker’s First Amended Answer and

5

Counterclaims as follows:

6

1.

On April 25, 2014, after a one-month extension of time to which KSEA had

7

stipulated (Doc. No. 24), Stryker filed its Answer and Counterclaims. (Doc. No. 40). On May

8

16, 2014, KSEA filed a Motion to Strike and Dismiss with Prejudice certain of Stryker’s

9

Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims. (Doc. Nos. 45 and 46).

10

2.

On May 23, 2014, the parties filed a Stipulation and Proposed Order to extend

11

Stryker’s time to respond to KSEA’s Motion to Strike by one week and to extend KSEA’s time

12

to file a reply in support of the Motion to Strike by one week. (Doc. No. 51). The Court entered

13

the Stipulation and Order on May 28, 2014. (Doc. No. 52).

14

3.

On June 6, 2014, Stryker filed its First Amended Answer and Counterclaims.

15

(Doc. No. 55). Under Federal Rule 15(a)(3), KSEA would have 14 days, or until June 20, 2014,

16

to respond to Stryker’s First Amended Answer and Counterclaims.

17

4.

Due to previously planned travel, and to allow KSEA a full and fair opportunity

18

to respond to the additional and new allegations contained in Stryker’s First Amended Answer

19

and Counterclaims, KSEA requests a one-week extension of time to respond to Stryker’s First

20

Amended Answer and Counterclaims. Specifically, KSEA requests until June 27, 2014 to

21

respond. Stryker has stipulated to this extension. This extension will not change or alter any

22

other deadlines currently set by the Court.

23

5.

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(a)(1)-(3), this stipulated request is accompanied

24

by the Declaration of Benjamin C. White setting forth (a) the reasons for the requested

25

rescheduling; (b) all previous time modifications in this case; and (c) the effect of the requested

26

rescheduling.

27
28

Case No. C 14-00876 RS
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO
DEFENDANT’S AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS

Respectfully submitted,

1
2

Dated: June 17, 2014

3

BECK, BISMONTE & FINLEY, LLP
/s/ Alfredo A. Bismonte 1
Alfredo A. Bismonte (Cal. Bar. No. 136154)
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Karl Storz
Endoscopy-America, Inc.

4
5
6
Dated: June 17, 2014

REED SMITH LLP

7
8

_/s/ William R. Overend______________
William R. Overend (SBN 180209)
Attorneys for Stryker Corporation and
Stryker Communications, Inc.

9
10
11
12
13

ORDER

14
15
16

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED
June 17,
DATED: __________________________, 2014

17

____________________________
Honorable Richard G. Seeborg
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

In compliance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i), I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this
document has been obtained from each of the other signatories hereto.
Case No. C 14-00876 RS
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO
DEFENDANT’S AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS