United Brands Company, Inc. v. Anheuser-Bush, Inc.

Filing 57

MOTION to Continue Unopposed Motion to Continue Scheduled Dates by United Brands Company, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Brian Behmer, # 2 Proof of Service)(Behmer, Brian) (cge).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

NANCY O. DIX (Bar No. 129150)
BRIAN L. BEHMER (Bar No. 156978)
CHRISTINA D. YATES (Bar No. 201748)
CHRISTOPHER J. BEAL (Bar No. 216579)
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
401 B Street, Suite 1700
San Diego, CA 92101-4297
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

8

Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

9

Attorneys for Plaintiff
UNITED BRANDS COMPANY, INC.

10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14
15
16
17

UNITED BRANDS COMPANY, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
ANHEUSER-BUSCH, INC.,
Defendant.

18

CASE NO. 10-cv-2281-AJB (KSC)
DECLARATION OF BRIAN BEHMER IN
SUPPORT OF UNOPPOSED MOTION TO
CONTINUE SCHEDULED DATES
District Judge:
Hon. Anthony J. Battaglia
Magistrate Judge: Hon. Karen S. Crawford
Complaint: November 4, 2010

19
I, Brian Behmer, declare as follows:

20
21

1.

I am the attorney for plaintiff, UNITED BRANDS COMPANY, INC. I have

22

personal knowledge of each of the facts set forth in this declaration and if required, could and

23

would competently testify thereto.

24

2.

This is Plaintiff’s first request to continue pretrial dates.

25

3.

I have been in contact with counsel for Defendant Anheuser-Busch, Inc. (“A-B”),

26
27
28
DLA P IPER LLP (US)
SAN DIEGO

and am informed that A-B does not oppose this request by United Brands.
4.

The parties last appeared before the Court on February 10, 2012, for a

Settlement/Case Management Conference. When the case did not settle on that date, Magistrate
-1WEST\229740528.1

10-CV-2281-AJB (KSC)

1

Judge McCurine strongly encouraged the parties to continue a settlement dialogue, and the parties

2

recently agreed to both a mediator and a mediation date. The mediation will take place on April

3

25, 2012, which is the first available date for the parties and the mediator, Hon. Leo S. Papas,

4

Ret..

5

5.

The parties’ respective discovery responses are due prior to and immediately after

6

the mediation date, thereby requiring the parties to expend considerable time and resources on

7

responding to discovery and document production, including electronic discovery, in advance of

8

the mediation. United Brands’ discovery responses are currently due on April 7, 2012, and A-B’s

9

are due on April 30, 2012.

10
11
12
13

6.

I have conferred with counsel for A-B, and we agree that significant expenditures

of resources in discovery will likely make settlement more difficult in this case.
7.

Good cause exists for this continuance because the parties are engaged in

settlement negotiations and are participating in mediation on April 25, 2012.

14
15

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of California and the United

16

States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this _____ day of April, 2012

17

at San Diego, California.

18
19
20

Dated: April 5, 2012

21

DLA PIPER LLP (US)
By: s/Brian L. Behmer
BRIAN L. BEHMER
[e-mail]

22
23

Attorneys for Plaintiff
UNITED BRANDS COMPANY, INC.

24
25
26
27
28
DLA P IPER LLP (US)
SAN DIEGO

-2WEST\229740528.1

10-CV-2281-AJB (KSC)