Plexxikon Inc. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation

Filing 359

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 358 Stipulation re Leave to File Amended Joint Proposed Jury Instructions. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/3/2020)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 DURIE TANGRI LLP DARALYN J. DURIE (SBN 169825) DAVID McGOWAN (SBN 154289) LAURA E. MILLER (SBN 271713) EUGENE NOVIKOV (SBN 257849) RAGHAV R. KRISHNAPRIYAN (SBN 273411) MATTHEW W. SAMUELS (SBN 294668) 217 Leidesdorff Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: 415-362-6666 Facsimile: 415-236-6300 YOUNG BASILE HANLON & MACFARLANE, P.C. JEFFREY D. WILSON (Pro Hac Vice) ANDREW R. BASILE, JR. (SBN 208396) EDDIE D. WOODWORTH (Pro Hac Vice) RYAN T. MCCLEARY (Pro Hac Vice) 3001 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 624 Troy, MI 48084 Telephone: 248-649-3333 Facsimile: 248-649-3338 17 18 MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP THOMAS P. STEINDLER (Pro Hac Vice) PAUL M. SCHOENHARD (Pro Hac Vice) IAN B. BROOKS (Pro Hac Vice) DAVID MLAVER (Pro Hac Vice) 500 N. Capitol St., N.W. Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: 202-756-8000 Facsimile: 202-756-8087 MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP WILLIAM G. GAEDE III (SBN: 136184) 275 Middlefield Road, Suite 100 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Telephone: 650-815-7400 Facsimile: 650-469-1470 MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP KATHERINE NICOLE CLOUSE (Pro Hac Vice) 28 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Telephone: 617-535-4000 Facsimile: 617-535-3800 Attorneys for Defendant Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation Attorneys for Plaintiff PLEXXIKON INC. 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 20 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 21 OAKLAND DIVISION 22 PLEXXIKON INC., 23 24 25 26 27 Case No. 4:17-cv-04405-HSG Plaintiff, v. NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORPORATION, Defendant. STIPULATION AND ORDER RE LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED JOINT PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS Date: Time: Ctrm: Judge: December 3, 2019 3:00 p.m. 2 – 4th Floor Honorable Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. 28 STIP. RE LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED PROP. JURY INSTRUCTIONS / CASE NO. 4:17-CV-04405-HSG 1 Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-12, Plaintiff Plexxikon Inc. (“Plexxikon”) and Defendant Novartis 2 Pharmaceuticals Corporation (“Novartis”) (collectively, “the parties”) hereby jointly request that the Court 3 grant leave to file the attached Amended Joint Jury Instructions (Ex. A). 4 I. FACTS 5 The parties first filed Joint Proposed Jury Instructions on October 18, 2019. (ECF No. 309). The 6 Court held a case management conference on December 3, 2019, at which it directed the parties “to meet 7 and confer regarding substantive jury instructions and e-file by December 20th a revised set of complete 8 jury instructions.” ECF Nos. 347; see also ECF No. 352 at 10:12-19, 12:11. Pursuant to that order, the 9 parties filed a revised set of complete jury instructions on December 20, 2019. (ECF No. 357). 10 On December 23, 2019, Plexxikon revised its proposal for Disputed Final Instruction No. 27. 11 Thereafter, the parties exchanged revised one-page position statements. Plexxikon’s revised proposal and 12 the parties’ updated position statements are incorporated in the attached Amended Joint Proposed Jury 13 Instructions (Exhibit A), which the parties seek leave to file. 14 15 The Court has set March 25, 2020 for a hearing on jury instructions. ECF No. 347. II. DISCUSSION 16 Good cause exists for the Court to grant leave because the proposed changes to the current Joint 17 Proposed Jury Instructions (ECF No. 357) reflect the parties’ continued work to resolve disputes regarding 18 the jury instructions. 19 attached Amended Joint Jury Instructions (Ex. A). Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that they be permitted to file the 20 21 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED: 22 23 24 25 26 1/3/2020 __________________________ Date __________________________________________ Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. United States District Judge 27 28 1 STIP. RE LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED PROP. JURY INSTRUCTIONS / CASE NO. 4:17-CV-04405-HSG

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?