Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Composite Resources, Inc. v. Recon Medical, LLC, 2:17-cv-01755-MMD-VCF. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20181211b63 Visitors: 7
Filed: Dec. 10, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 10, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING ECF NO. 141 MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . Plaintiff Composite Resources, Inc. ("CRI") and Defendant Recon Medical, LLC ("Recon" and with CRI the "Parties"), by and through their respective counsel and for good cause shown stipulate and agree as follows: On September 10, 2018 and with leave of the Court, CRI filed its Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 106) making a single and limited amendment. On September 14, 2018 Recon filed its Answer (ECF
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING ECF NO. 141

Plaintiff Composite Resources, Inc. ("CRI") and Defendant Recon Medical, LLC ("Recon" and with CRI the "Parties"), by and through their respective counsel and for good cause shown stipulate and agree as follows:

On September 10, 2018 and with leave of the Court, CRI filed its Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 106) making a single and limited amendment.

On September 14, 2018 Recon filed its Answer (ECF No. 108).

CRI found Recon's Answer objectionable and subsequently moved to strike. That motion was fully briefed. (ECF Nos. 119, 123, and 131).

On November 9, 2018, Magistrate Ferenbach issued an Order striking Recon's Answer without prejudice and granting Recon until December 10, 2018 to file a limited answer, and to file any motion to amend its answer under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. (ECF No. 135 at 5:1-3).

On November 26, 2018 Recon filed Objections to the Magistrate's Order. (ECF No. 141).

Recon's primary concern is default or waiver of its counterclaims and defenses.

CRI's primary concern is potential prejudice caused by Recon's revisions in its Answer, as discovery closed in June of 2018 and dispositive motions have been fully briefed for several weeks.

Rather than engage in what is likely to be lengthy and substantial motion practice regarding the pleadings at this stage of litigation, the Parties would prefer to conserve their resources and not burden the Court.

Accordingly, the Parties stipulate as follows:

Recon's prior answer (ECF No. 19) is deemed the operative and responsive pleading to CRI's Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 106).

CRI's answer (ECF No. 23) is deemed the operative and responsive pleading to Recon's counterclaims found in ECF No. 19.

If the Court accepts and enters this stipulation and order, Recon agrees that its Objection (ECF No. 141) is deemed withdrawn, or alternatively denied as moot.

If the Court declines to accept this stipulation and order, the Parties agree that CRI shall have seven days from the denial of this stipulation to file any response to Recon's Objection (ECF No. 141).

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer