Gotham Insurance Company v. Shasta Technologies, LLC et al
Filing
187
STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE (granting 175 ). Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 10/13/2016. (blflc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/13/2016)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
OGLOZA FORTNEY LLP
Darius Ogloza (SBN 176983)
dogloza@oglozafortney.com
David C. Fortney (SBN 226767)
dfortney@oglozafortney.com
535 Pacific Avenue, Suite 201
San Francisco, California 94133
Telephone: (415) 912-1850
Facsimile: (415) 887-5349
Attorneys for Defendants and Cross-Defendants
Shasta Technologies, LLC,
Calvin A. Knickerbocker, Jr.,
and Calvin A. Knickerbocker III
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BAER & TROFF, LLP
Eric L. Troff (SBN 110031)
eric@btllp.com
35 N. Lake Avenue, Suite 670
Pasadena, California 91101
Telephone: (310) 802-4202
Facsimile: (626) 568-2800
Attorneys for Defendants and Cross-Complainants
InstaCare Corp. and PharmaTech Solutions, Inc.
16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
17
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
18
19
GOTHAM INSURANCE COMPANY,
20
Plaintiff in Interpleader,
21
22
23
24
25
26
CASE NO. 5:13-cv-03810 BLF
STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER
v.
SHASTA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC; CALVIN
A. KNICKERBOCKER, III; CALVIN A.
KNICKERBOCKER, JR.; INSTACARE
CORP.; and PHARMATECH SOLUTIONS,
INC.,
Defendants in Interpleader.
AND RELATED COUNTER-CLAIM.
27
28
STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
1
Defendants and Cross-Defendants Shasta Technologies, LLC (“Shasta”), Calvin A.
2
Knickerbocker, Jr., and Calvin A. Knickerbocker, III, together with Defendants Decision
3
Diagnostics Corp., formerly known as InstaCare Corp., and PharmaTech Solutions, Inc.
4
(Decision Diagnostics Corp. and PharmaTech Solutions, Inc. together, “PharmaTech,” and all of
5
the above collectively, the “Parties”) state as follows:
6
WHEREAS, Plaintiff in Interpleader Gotham Insurance Company (“Gotham”) filed an
7
original complaint in interpleader on August 16, 2013, against Shasta and PharmaTech,
8
concerning the rights of Shasta and PharmaTech to proceeds of $578,733.58 under an intellectual
9
property defense reimbursement insurance policy issued by Gotham to Shasta;
10
WHEREAS, Gotham filed a First Amended Complaint on August 5, 2014, against Shasta
11
and PharmaTech and alleging additional claims against Calvin A. Knickerbocker, Jr. and Calvin
12
A. Knickerbocker, III;
13
14
15
WHEREAS, PharmaTech filed a cross-claim on August 5, 2014 against Shasta, Calvin A.
Knickerbocker, Jr. and Calvin A. Knickerbocker, III;
WHEREAS, all claims between Gotham, Shasta and the Knickerbockers were dismissed,
16
except for Gotham’s interpleader and declaratory relief claims as against both Shasta and
17
PharmaTech, and Gotham was dismissed from the action, pursuant to this Court’s Order dated
18
February 4, 2015;
19
WHEREAS, the disputed proceeds of $578,733.58 have been deposited with this Court;
20
WHEREAS, the Parties attended a settlement conference in this matter held on August
21
22
23, 2016, in front of Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero; and
WHEREAS, the Parties have reached agreement on the terms of a settlement, the terms
23
of which are set forth in this Stipulated Settlement, that they consider to be a just, fair, adequate
24
and equitable resolution of the issues in this case;
25
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS:
26
1. That the Court enter an order disbursing the funds deposited by Gotham with the
27
Court in this interpleader action as follows: the amount of $201,500.00 shall be paid to the client
28
trust account of Baer & Troff LLP, to be held in trust for PharmaTech; and the balance of the
1
STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
1
interpleaded proceeds (approximately $377,233.58) shall be paid to the client trust account of
2
Ogloza Fortney LLP, to be held in trust for Shasta.
3
4
2. This case shall be dismissed in its entirety with prejudice, with each side to bear its
own costs.
5
3. Neither Shasta nor Calvin Knickerbocker, Jr. shall have any contact, directly or
6
indirectly, with any persons known by them to be shareholders of PharmaTech Solutions, Inc. or
7
Decision Diagnostics Corp., other than Keith Berman.
8
4. Shasta and Calvin Knickerbocker, Jr. agree that they shall not contact the United
9
States Food and Drug Administration with regard to the GenStrip or related diagnostic blood
10
glucose test strip products during the pendency of that certain action captioned PharmaTech
11
Solutions, Inc. v. Shasta Technologies, LLC, Case No. 56-2015-00466606-CU-BC-VTA,
12
Superior Court for the County of Ventura.
13
14
15
Dated: August 26, 2016
16
OGLOZA FORTNEY LLP
By:
17
18
/s/ David Fortney
David Fortney
Attorneys for Defendants and CrossDefendants Shasta Technologies, Inc.,
Calvin A. Knickerbocker, Jr. and Calvin
A. Knickerbocker, III
19
20
21
22
Dated: August 26, 2015
BAER & TROFF, LLP
23
24
By:
/s/ Eric Troff
Eric Troff
25
26
27
Attorneys for Defendants and CrossComplainants InstaCare Corp. and
PharmaTech Solutions, Inc.
28
2
STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
[PROPOSED] ORDER
1
2
3
4
5
6
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS ORDERED that the settlement terms set forth
in the Parties’ Stipulated Settlement above are hereby incorporated into this Order;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amount of $201,500.00 shall be paid by the Clerk
of this Court to the client trust account of Baer & Troff LLP, to be held in trust for PharmaTech;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the balance of the interpleaded proceeds
7
(approximately $377,233.58) shall be paid to the client trust account of Ogloza Fortney LLP, to
8
be held in trust for Shasta;
9
10
11
12
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Court shall have continuing jurisdiction to
enforce this Order and the terms of the Parties’ settlement herein;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE,
with each side to bear its own costs.
13
14
15
DATED: _____________________, 2016
______________________________________
JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
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?