August 27, 2013
ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff,
SECURITY ONE INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al., Defendants.
David J. Millstein, Esq. (SBN 87878), MILLSTEIN & ASSOCIATES, San Francisco, California, C. Sanders McNew (admitted pro hac vice), McNEW P.A., Boca Raton, Florida, Attorneys for the Plaintiff, ADT Security Services, Inc.
Andrew Winghart, Esq., WINGHART LAW GROUP, Redwood City, CA, John O'Bryan, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice), Megan Kokontis, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice), FREEBORN & PETERS LLP, Chicago, IL, Attorneys for Defendants Security One International, Inc. and Claudio Hand.
PROPOSED ORDER REGARDING TRIAL STIPULATIONS
GONZALEZ ROGERS, District Judge.
Plaintiff ADT Security Services, Inc. ("ADT") and Defendants Security One International, Inc. and Claudio Hand ("Defendants") jointly submit this Proposed Order regarding trial stipulations. The parties agree that the terms of this stipulation shall not be binding or effective unless and until the Court accepts the stipulated terms in their entirety. The parties reserve the right to withdraw agreement to any or all terms if the Court chooses not to accept any term.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE, through their respective counsel of record, as follows:
TRIAL STIPULATIONS AND PROPOSED ORDER
1. The parties stipulate that counsel will produce employees of their respective clients listed on the witness lists to testify in this action.
2. The parties stipulate that the court may take judicial notice of the number of households in the United States as published on the U.S. Census bureau website, 114, 761, 359 for 2007-2011.
3. The parties stipulate that for any witness who is testifying via trial deposition rather than through live testimony, the relevant excerpts will be read into the record by an attorney and paralegal or by two attorneys for the party offering the witness or designation.
4. The parties stipulate that to the extent that recordings are played during the trial, the parties agree to waive the court reporting of said recordings.
5. The parties stipulate that any evidence or testimony regarding any of Defendants' insurance is inadmissible.
6. The parties stipulate that ADT is precluded from introducing at trial (via proposed jury instruction or otherwise) any evidence regarding any provisions of the Lanham Act not included in the Fourth Amended Complaint, in particular 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B).
7. The parties stipulate that ADT will not seek as damages disgorgement of Security One's profits.
8. The parties stipulate to incorporate into the trial record without the necessity of supporting testimony or exhibits the undisputed fact that Security One has not been a Honeywell dealer or affiliated with Honeywell, nor has Honeywell at any time authorized Security One to represent itself as having an business relationship or affiliation with Honeywell or use its logo during the time period relevant to this case; however, Security One has legally sold and installed Honeywell equipment during the relevant period.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED