Principle Solutions LLC v. Feed.Ing BV
Filing
212
ORDER signed by Judge Rudolph T. Randa on 9/18/2015. Parties to 13-C-223 and 14-C-1241 actions MUST ENGAGE IN MEDIATION before a mutually agreed upon mediator. Such mediation MUST BE COMPLETED no later than 10/30/2015. Briefing of pending motions in both actions STAYED until 10/30/2015. If mediation is unsuccessful, briefing of pending motions MUST RESUME effective 10/31/2015. (cc: all counsel)(cb)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
PRINCIPLE SOLUTIONS, LLC,
Plaintiff,
-vs-
Case No. 13-C-223
FEED.ING BV, SVEN GRAVENDEEL,
NATURAL BALANCE PET FOODS, INC.,
and JERRY BALL,
Defendants.
FEED.ING BV,
Plaintiff,
-vs-
Case No. 14-C-1241
PRINCIPLE SOLUTIONS, LLC;
PRINCIPLE INVESTMENTS, INC.;
KEVIN M. ZIMMER; GCAM, LLC;
GCAM-R, LLC; KEVIN M. ZIMMER
AND AMY E. ZIMMER REVOCABLE
TRUST; KEVIN ZIMMER AND
AMY ZIMMER IN THEIR CAPACITY
AS TRUSTEES OF THE KEVIN M.
ZIMMER AND AMY E. ZIMMER
REVOCABLE TRUST; and PRODUCE
PRODUCERS,
Defendants,
and
COMMERCE STATE BANK,
Intervenor.
DECISION AND ORDER
This Order affects the two above-captioned related actions and
therefore is being issued in both actions, although it addresses the
September 16 request (ECF No. 209) of Defendants Feed.ing B.V. and
Sven Gravendeel (collectively “Feed”) and Plaintiff Principle Solutions,
Inc. (“Principle”) filed in Case No. 13-C-223, (the “223 action”) that the
parties to both actions be required to engage in mediation to be completed
within the next six weeks by a mutually agreed upon mediator, and that
concurrently the proceedings in both cases be stayed. These parties state
that substantial discovery has been taken in the 223 action, and that Feed
and Principle believe that there is an opportunity for a global resolution of
that case and Case No. 14-C-1241 (the “1241 action”), and that all parties
to the 1241 action support their requests. They further state that if the
mediation is unsuccessful, the parties will confer in good faith regarding
revised scheduling orders that would preserve the scheduled trial dates.
Defendant Jerry Ball does not oppose the mediation; however, he
states that it should be conducted after non-expert fact discovery closes on
December 4, 2015. (ECF No. 210.) He opposes the stay, contending that all
deadlines set by the July 15, 2015, Scheduling Order should remain in
-2-
place. Defendant Natural Balance Pet Foods, Inc. states that mediation
should be conducted after fact discovery has concluded on December 4 and
that a stay of the scheduling order could jeopardize the remaining dates on
the scheduling order. (ECF No. 211.)
Upon consideration of the parties’ positions, the Court directs
immediate mediation of the two actions to conclude within six weeks; this
mediation will channel the parties’ resources in a manner that may
ultimately resolve the disputes in a more cost-effective manner and also
conserve Court resources. The briefing of the pending motions in both
actions will be stayed, and the Court will not consider any fully briefed
motions until after the end of the six-week period. However, given the
concerns expressed by the parties’ during the scheduling conferences, the
minimal leeway of the deadlines set by the scheduling orders, and the
current positions of all parties, the scheduling order dates and deadlines
will remain in place and will not be stayed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BASED ON THE FOREGOING, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
The parties to the 223 and the 1241 actions MUST engage in
mediation before a mutually agreed upon meditator. That mediation
MUST be completed no later than October 30, 2015;
-3-
The briefing of the pending motions in both actions is STAYED
until October 30, 2015; and,
If the mediation is unsuccessful the briefing of all pending motions
MUST resume effective October 31, 2015.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 18th day of September, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
__________________________
HON. RUDOLPH T. RANDA
U.S. District Judge
-4-
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?