Gaeta v. Perrigo Pharmaceuticals Company et al
Filing
396
ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Case Management Statement due by 12/2/2011. Case Management Conference set for 12/12/2011 10:00 AM in Courtroom 9, 19th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge James Ware on 10/25/11. (sis, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/25/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
9
Margarita Gaeta, et al.,
10
NO. C 05-04115 JW
Plaintiffs,
ORDER CONTINUING CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
11
Perrigo Pharmaceuticals Company,
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
v.
12
Defendant.
13
/
14
15
This case is scheduled for a Case Management Conference on October 31, 2011. On
16
October 21, 2011, the parties filed a Joint Case Management Conference Statement indicating that
17
Defendant has filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court which “is currently set
18
for conference on October 28, 2011.”1 Defendant contends that it “anticipates its petition will be
19
granted,” in light of the Supreme Court’s “recent decision of the issues at play in this case” in two
20
other cases, and contends that the Court should vacate the October 31 Conference and stay any
21
further action until the Supreme Court issues its determination on Defendant’s petition. (Id.)
22
Plaintiffs contend that because there is “no way to determine the amount of time [the Supreme
23
Court] will take to determine whether it will accept the case,” the Court should “set this matter for
24
trial and then inform [the Supreme Court] of the schedule so [the Supreme Court] can either issue a
25
ruling within that time period, or stay the proceedings in this case.” (Id.)
26
27
28
1
(See Joint Case Management Conference Statement at 3, Docket Item No. 393.)
1
Based on the parties’ representations, the Court finds good cause to continue the Conference
2
pending the Supreme Court’s determination on Defendant’s petition for certiorari. Accordingly, the
3
Court CONTINUES the Case Management Conference to December 12, 2011 at 10 a.m. On or
4
before December 2, 2011, the parties shall submit a Joint Case Management Statement updating the
5
Court on the status of the Supreme Court proceedings and provide a good faith proposed schedule
6
on how this case should proceed.
7
8
9
Dated: October 25, 2011
JAMES WARE
United States District Chief Judge
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:
2
Andrew Joseph Spielberger witzer@witzerlaw.com
Bill Zook bzook@tedlyon.com
Brian David Witzer witzer@witzerlaw.com
Colin C. Munro cmunro@archernorris.com
Colleen T. Davies cdavies@reedsmith.com
David D Mesa david.mesa@sdma.com
Genese Kay Dopson genese.dopson@sdma.com
J. David Bickham dbickham@reedsmith.com
James Conner Barber jcb888@aol.com
Jennifer Brenda Bonneville jennifer.bonneville@sdma.com
Joseph P. Thomas jthomas@ulmer.com
Judith Belle Anderson janderson@archernorris.com
Juliet W. Starrett jstarrett@reedsmith.com
Kelly Savage Day kelly.savage@sdma.com
Kenneth C. Ward kcward@archernorris.com
Marquette William Wolf mwolf@tedlyon.com
Meghan Kathleen Landrum mklandrum@reedsmith.com
Michael F. Healy michael.healy@sdma.com
Miranda Picken Neal miranda.neal@madera-county.com
Prentiss Wilmer Hallenbeck phallenbeck@ulmer.com
Randall Penner penner.bradley@sbcglobal.net
Rebecca Marie Biernat Rebecca.Biernat@tuckerellis.com
Rowena Javier Dizon rowena@witzerlaw.com
Thomas Michael Frieder tmf@hassard.com
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
13
14
15
Dated: October 25, 2011
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
16
By:
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
/s/ JW Chambers
Susan Imbriani
Courtroom Deputy
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?