SYNTHES, INC. v. KNAPP

Case No. 2:13-cv-02261-MCE.

SYNTHES, INC. AND DEPUY SYNTHES SALES, INC., Plaintiffs/Counterclaim-Defendants, v. GREGORY KNAPP, Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff.

United States District Court, E.D. California.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity - Other Contract
Nature of Suit: 190 Contract: Other
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Synthes Inc, Plaintiff, represented by Howard M. Knee , Blank Rome LLP.

Synthes Inc, Plaintiff, represented by Ann E. Querns , Blank Rome LLP, pro hac vice, Anthony B. Haller , Blank Rome LLP, pro hac vice, Michael Lester Ludwig , Blank Rome LLP & Scott F. Cooper , Blank Rome LLP, pro hac vice.

DePuy Synthes Sales, Inc., Plaintiff, represented by Howard M. Knee , Blank Rome LLP, Ann E. Querns , Blank Rome LLP, pro hac vice, Anthony B. Haller , Blank Rome LLP, pro hac vice, Michael Lester Ludwig , Blank Rome LLP & Scott F. Cooper , Blank Rome LLP, pro hac vice.

Gregory Knapp, Defendant, represented by John T. Kinn , Segal & Associates, PC, Malcolm S. Segal , Segal & Associates, PC, Ralph J. Kelly , McShea Law Firm, P.C., pro hac vice & John P. McShea, III , McShea Law Firm, P.C., pro hac vice.

K2M, Inc., ThirdParty Defendant, represented by Allegra A. Jones , Duane Morris LLP & Shannon Hampton Sutherland , Duane Morris LLP, pro hac vice.

Gregory Knapp, Counter Claimant, represented by John T. Kinn , Segal & Associates, PC, Malcolm S. Segal , Segal & Associates, PC, Ralph J. Kelly , McShea Law Firm, P.C., pro hac vice & John P. McShea, III , McShea Law Firm, P.C., pro hac vice.

DePuy Synthes Sales, Inc., Counter Defendant, represented by Howard M. Knee , Blank Rome LLP, Anthony B. Haller , Blank Rome LLP, pro hac vice, Michael Lester Ludwig , Blank Rome LLP & Scott F. Cooper , Blank Rome LLP, pro hac vice.

Synthes Inc, Counter Defendant, represented by Howard M. Knee , Blank Rome LLP, Anthony B. Haller , Blank Rome LLP, pro hac vice, Michael Lester Ludwig , Blank Rome LLP & Scott F. Cooper , Blank Rome LLP, pro hac vice.


PROPOSED STIPULATED ORDER AMENDING PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., District Judge.

WHEREAS, on September 2, 2016, the Court entered an Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order, extending the deadline by which the parties must designate supplemental experts until September 30, 2016 (ECF No. 75);

WHEREAS, on November 2, 2016, the Court upon its own motion vacated the April 20, 2017 final pretrial conference and June 12, 2017 jury trial and further ordered the parties must file a Joint Notice of Trial Readiness within thirty (30) days of receiving the Court's ruling on the pending dispositive motion (ECF No. 81);

WHEREAS, the parties have exchanged expert reports but have not yet conducted expert depositions;

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed that all positions and defenses related to the measuring period for any damages are fully preserved until decided by the Court;

NOW, THEREFORE, to avoid unnecessary expense to the parties if the pending dispositive motion is granted, the parties respectfully request the Court to extend the time for which the parties must file a Joint Notice of Trial Readiness to be within ninety (90) days of the date of the Court's ruling on the pending dispositive motion, with expert depositions to occur within forty (40) days of the Court's ruling on the pending dispositive motion.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases