Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lift-U, A Division of Hogan Mfg., Inc., A California v. Ricon Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


August 1, 2012

LIFT-U, A DIVISION OF HOGAN MFG., INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
RICON CORP., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, AND WESTINGHOUSE AIR BRAKE TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION DBA VAPOR BUS INTERNATIONAL, A DELAWARE CORPORATION,
DEFENDANTS.
LIFT-U, A DIVISION OF HOGAN MFG., INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
NORTH AMERICAN BUS INDUSTRIES, INC., AN ALABAMA CORPORATION ,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Lucy H. Koh United States District Court Judge

LARIVIERE, GRUBMAN & PAYNE, LLP Robert W. Payne, Esq. (Bar No. 073901) Email: rpayne@lgpatlaw.com Scott J. Allen, Esq. (Bar No. 178925) Email: sallen@lgpatlaw.com Post Office Box 3140 19 Upper Ragsdale Drive Monterey, CA 93942-3140 Telephone: (831) 649-8800 Facsimile: (831) 649-8835 Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant LIFT-U, A DIVISION OF HOGAN MFG., INC.

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND PENDING DEADLINES AS MODIFIED

The parties held a settlement conference on July 27, 2012 with Magistrate Judge Lloyd. 2

The presidents of the parties were in attendance at the request of the Court. Mark Hogan, 3 president of Plaintiff Lift-U, Jim Marcotuli, president of defendant North American Bus 4 Industries, and Al Neupaver, CEO of defendant Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies (the 5 parent company of defendant Ricon Corporation) were present at the conference. 6 7

The settlement conference lasted the entire day, from 9:30 a.m. until after 5:00 p.m.. The parties believe they are close to reaching a settlement, and exchanged a term sheet outlining a 9 possible settlement. Defendants' counsel is drafting a proposed definitive agreement for review 10 by Plaintiff. 11

At the time of the settlement conference, the parties had pending dates for depositions of 12 four expert witnesses, and other outstanding discovery matters. In light of the discussions during 13 the settlement conference, the parties agreed to postpone the pending discovery. 14 15

In order to have time to finalize a settlement, the parties, acting by and through their 16 counsel of record, request a brief continuance of current deadlines in the case. 17

NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 18

1. The discovery cutoff of August 1, 2012 should be continued for a period of 19 approximately 3 weeks, until August 17, 2012 to complete the postponed expert depositions and 20 other outstanding discovery matters; 21

2. The August 9, 2012 deadline for filing dispositive motions should be postponed 22 23 until August 30, 2012; 24

3. The last day to hear dispositive motions and case management conference now 25 scheduled for September 13, 2012 should be postponed until October 5, 2012;

, is continued to October 11, 2012, at 1:30 p.m.;

4. The pretrial conference currently scheduled for October 31, 2012, should be is rescheduled until November continued to November 15, 19, 2012, or as seen thereafter as the Court is available; 2012, at 1:30 p.m.; and

5. The trial of this case, currently set to start on November 26, 2012, should be remains as set on November 26, 2012.

rescheduled to December 10, 2012, or as soon thereafter as the Court is available. 5

AGREED TO BY THE PARTIES THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL OF 6 7 RECORD.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED., AS MODIFIED.

20120801

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.