CALIFORNIA NATURAL PRODUCTS (d/b/a POWER AUTOMATION SYSTEMS), a California corporation, Plaintiff,
ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS, INC. (d/b/a HARTNESS INTERNATIONAL, INC.), a Delaware corporation, Defendant.
Jeffrey W. Shopoff (Bar No. 46278) Gregory S. Cavallo (Bar No. 173270) Paul F. Kirsch (Bar No. 127446) James M. Robinson (Bar No. 238063) SHOPOFF CAVALLO & KIRSCH LLP, San Francisco, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff California Natural Products.
GRIPPO & ELDEN LLC, Lynn H. Murray, Attorneys for Defendant ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS, INC.
POOLE & SHAFFERY, LLP, David S. Poole, Attorneys for Defendant ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS, INC.
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULE
JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.
Plaintiff California Natural Products and Defendant Illinois Tool Works hereby stipulate and jointly request that the Court continue the current trial schedule to allow an additional approximately 150 days, with the pre-trial dates adjusted as well. Good cause for such a continuance is based on the following:
First, and most important, after substantial exchange of documents and letters discussing the parties' positions, the parties have agreed to mediate this case in early 2014. In order to enhance the likelihood of settlement, the parties seek to focus their efforts on trying to resolve this matter at the mediation and avoid the costs associated with fact depositions and expert disclosures. Second, the parties' document productions, including electronic discovery and production and translation of Spanish-language documents, has caused unanticipated difficulties and delays. The parties have produced close to 15, 000 documents (over 50, 000 pages) and are producing more. The parties' technical experts have not yet had an opportunity to review key documents, however, and will not be able to do so and prepare expert reports by the current deadline of December 11, 2013. In addition, the delay in document exchange has caused a delay in the scheduling of fact depositions, which may also be important in the formulation of expert opinions. The parties are working cooperatively and in good faith to resolve these issues but seek the extension to provide an opportunity to focus on settlement.
To allow discovery to advance further prior to the completion of expert reports, the parties have cooperated in drafting a revised schedule for the Court's consideration. This schedule proposes adjusting the trial date by approximately 150 days, with interim dates adjusted as well by agreement. The revised schedule remains within the Court's typical schedule.
Event Current Proposed Mid-litigation statement to the court Mon., Dec. 16, 2013 Fri., May 16, 2014 (status of all motions already filed and likelihood of future motions) Expert disclosure, including report Wed., Dec. 11, 2013 Thu., June 26, 2014 Close of fact discovery Fri., Feb. 7, 2014 Fri., July 11, 2014 Rebuttal expert disclosure, including Fri., Jan. 17, 2014 Thu., July 17, 2014 report Close of expert discovery Fri., Feb. 7, 2014 Fri., Aug. 8, 2014 Dispositive motions Fri., Feb. 21, 2014 Fri., Aug. 29, 2014 Dispositive motion responses Fri., Mar. 7, 2014 Fri., Sept. 19, 2014 Dispositive motion replies Fri., Mar. 21, 2014 Fri., Oct. 3, 2014 Hearing on dispositive motions Wed., Apr. 9, 2014 at Wed., Oct. 15, 2014 9:30 a.m. at 9:30 a.m.) Joint pretrial statement Fri., May 16, 2014 Fri., Dec. 10, 2014 Final pretrial conference Fri., May 23, 2014 at Wed., Dec. 17, 2014 11:00 a.m. at 3:00 P.M. Trial Mon., July 14, 2014, at Mon. February 9, 9:00 a.m. 2015 at 9:00 A.M.
For the reasons set forth in this Stipulation, the parties respectfully request that the Court enter the proposed schedule set forth above.
ORDER (AS MODIFIED BY ...