Regents of University of Michigan et al v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation

Filing 54

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 52 Stipulation Selecting Private ADR. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/18/2023)

Download PDF
Case 4:22-cv-04913-HSG Document 54 Filed 01/18/23 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, and THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Plaintiff(s) v. CASE No C 4:22-cv-04913-HSG STIPULATION AND ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORPORATION, Defendant(s) 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: ˆ Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5) ˆ Mediation (ADR L.R. 6) ˆ Early Settlement Conference with a Magistrate Judge (ADR L.R. 7) ■ Private ADR (specify process and provider) ˆ Private mediation with the mediator to be selected by the parties cooperating in good faith The parties agree to hold the ADR session by: ˆ the presumptive deadline (90 days from the date of the order referring the case to ADR) ■ other requested deadline: January 18, 2024 ˆ Date: January 17, 2023 Date: January 17, 2023 /s/ John M. Farrell Attorney for Plaintiff /s/ Arturo J. González Attorney for Defendant ˆ IT IS SO ORDERED.  ˆ IT IS SO ORDERED WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS: DATE: 1/18/2023  U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Important! E-file this form in ECFArturo using J.the appropriate event among these choices: “Stipulation & Proposed Order González Selecting Mediation” or “Stipulation & Proposed Order Selecting ENE” or “Stipulation & Proposed Order Selecting Early Settlement Conference with a Magistrate Judge” or “Stipulation & Proposed Order Selecting Private ADR.” Form ADR-Stip rev. 1-15-2019

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?