Coleman et al v. Boston Scientific Corporation
Filing
60
STIPULATION and ORDER CONTINUING the Scheduling Conference currently set for 11/22/2011, and RESETTING for 12/20/2011, at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 7 (SKO) before Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 11/2/2011. (Timken, A)
<![CDATA[
1 Eva M. Weiler (SBN: 233942)
eweiler@shb.com
2 Natasha L. Mosley (SBN: 246352)
nmosley@shb.com
3 SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P.
5 Park Plaza, Suite 1600
4 Irvine, California 92614-2546
Telephone: 949.475.1500
949.475.0016
5 Facsimile:
6 Attorneys for Defendant Boston Scientific Corporation
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT
10
11 PAMELA COLEMAN, an individual,
Plaintiff,
12
13
vs.
14 BOSTON SCIENTIFIC
CORPORATION, a Massachusetts
15 corporation, and DOE
MANUFACTURERS one through one
16 hundred,
Defendants.
17
18
19
20
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 1:10-CV-01968-OWW-SKO
Mag. Judge: Hon. Sheila K. Oberto
Dept.: 3
STIPULATION AND JOINT
REQUEST TO CONTINUE
SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
AND ORDER
Complaint filed: 10/20/2010
Trial Date: None set
21
22 TO THE COURT AND ALL ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
23
Plaintiff Pamela Coleman and Defendant Boston Scientific Corporation
24 (“BSC”), by and through their counsel of record, stipulate to and jointly request a
25 continuance of the scheduling conference based on the following:
26
1.
Plaintiff filed the complaint in this action on October 20, 2010 and BSC
27 was served with the complaint on or about December 29, 2010.
28
2.
The Court set a scheduling conference for April 6, 2011. (Doc. No. 6.)
STIPULATION AND JOINT REQUEST TO CONTINUE
SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
104076 V1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
3.
BSC filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on February 16, 2011.
(Doc. No. 9.) Pursuant to stipulation of the parties, the Court continued the
scheduling conference from April 6, 2011 to April 20, 2011 in light of BSC’s pending
motion to dismiss. (Doc. No. 16.)
4.
On April 11, 2011, the Court granted BSC’s motion to dismiss with leave
to amend. (See Doc. No. 29.)
5.
On April 12, 2011, the Court issued a minute order setting a scheduling
conference for July 22, 2011. (Doc. No. 26.)
6.
Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on June 17, 2011. (Doc. No.
31.) On July 7, 2011 BSC filed a motion to dismiss the first amended complaint and
the motion was set to be heard on August 15, 2011. (Doc. No. 34.)
7.
On July 11, 2011, the parties stipulated to continue the scheduling
conference to August 26, 2011to allow BSC’s motion to dismiss to be heard prior to
the scheduling conference and the submission of the joint scheduling conference
statement. The Court issued an order granting the stipulation and setting the
scheduling Conference for August 26, 2011. (See Doc. Nos. 37, 38.)
8.
On August 2, 2011, the Court issued a minute order continuing the
hearing on BSC’s motion to dismiss from August 15, 2011 to August 22, 2011. On
August 16, 2011, pursuant to stipulation of the parties, the court continued the
scheduling conference from August 26, 2011 to October 20, 2011 in light of the new
hearing date for BSC’s motion to dismiss. (Doc. No. 46.)
9.
On August 22, 2011, the Court granted BSC’s motion to dismiss the first
amended complaint with leave to amend. (Doc. No. 51.)
10.
On September 21, 2011 the October 20 scheduling conference date was
vacated due to the impending retirement of the Honorable Oliver W. Wanger. (See
Doc. No. 52.)
27
28
2
STIPULATION AND JOINT REQUEST TO CONTINUE
SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
104076 V1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
11.
On September 26, 2011, Plaintiff filed her second amended complaint.
(Doc. No. 53.)
12.
On October 24, 2011, the Court reset the scheduling conference to
November 22, 2011 before Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. The parties’ joint
scheduling report is due by November 15, 2011. (Doc. No. 56.)
13.
On October 26, 2011, BSC filed a motion to dismiss the second amended
complaint. (Doc. No. 58.) The motion is set for hearing on December 1, 2011.
14.
All parties have agreed and respectfully request that the scheduling
conference be continued to December 20, 2011, or to a date preferred by this Court, in
order for Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Plaintiffs’ Opposition thereto to be
considered. The parties also request that their joint scheduling report be due
December 13, 2011.
15.
There is good cause to continue the scheduling conference and the
submission of the joint scheduling conference statement until after the Court issues a
ruling on BSC’s motion to dismiss.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION AND JOINT REQUEST TO CONTINUE
SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
104076 V1
1
2
3
4
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, subject to the approval of the Court, that the
scheduling conference currently set for November 22, 2011, be continued to
December 20, 2011, or a date more convenient for the Court, and the parties’ joint
scheduling conference statement be due on December 13, 2011.
5
6
Dated: October 31, 2011
Respectfully Submitted,
7
SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P.
8
9
By:
10
11
/s/ Natasha L. Mosley
Natasha L. Mosley
Attorneys for Defendant
Boston Scientific Corporation
12
13
Dated: October 31, 2011
GIARDI KEESE
14
By:
15
16
17
18
/s/Amanda Kent
(authorized on October 31, 2011)
Thomas V. Girardi
Amy F. Solomon
Michael Kowsari
Amanda Kent
Attorneys for Plaintiff
19
ORDER
20
21
22
23
The scheduling conference presently scheduled for November 22, 2011, is
hereby continued to December 20, 2011, at 9:30 a.m. before Magistrate Judge Sheila
K. Oberto in Courtroom 7.
24
25
26
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
November 2, 2011
/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
27
C_Signature-END:
ie14hje
28
4
STIPULATION AND JOINT REQUEST TO CONTINUE
SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
104076 V1
]]>
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?
