Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Vertical Tank Inc. v. BakerCorp, 1:18-CV-00145-LJO-JLT. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20190109d38 Visitors: 3
Filed: Jan. 08, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 08, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . WHEREAS after Vertical Tank Inc. ("VTI") filed its responsive claim construction brief on December 21, 2018, a dispute arose between VTI and defendants Bakercorp and United Rentals (North America), Inc. ("URNA") (collectively, "Defendants") regarding VTI's use of extrinsic evidence in the form the declaration of Michael Morgenthaler submitted with VTI's responsive claim construction brief. The parties thereafter met and conf
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER

WHEREAS after Vertical Tank Inc. ("VTI") filed its responsive claim construction brief on December 21, 2018, a dispute arose between VTI and defendants Bakercorp and United Rentals (North America), Inc. ("URNA") (collectively, "Defendants") regarding VTI's use of extrinsic evidence in the form the declaration of Michael Morgenthaler submitted with VTI's responsive claim construction brief. The parties thereafter met and conferred regarding this dispute and came to an agreement among themselves to solve the dispute.

WHEREAS the parties agreed to select a date for a deposition of Mr. Morgenthaler within two to three weeks and that VTI would make him available for a deposition at Defendants' counsel's office, and petition the Court for an extension of the time for the Claim Construction hearing of approximately thirty days to allow Defendants to file a short supplemental response addressing Mr. Morgenthaler's opinions, and VTI's arguments relying on those opinions.

WHEREAS after the parties arrived at the above agreement, the same day the Court issued its order informing the parties that the Court believed the construction issues were fully presented in the parties' claim construction briefs and that no hearing on claim construction would be conducted. At the time the above agreement was made VTI anticipated that it would have an opportunity to argue contentions raised in the supplemental brief. Notwithstanding this assumption, VTI is willing to abide by the agreement and therefore signs this stipulation. However, VTI does so now without prejudice to the ability to petition the Court to file a short sur-rebuttal brief if the Court grants the instant request.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties to this case, through their respective counsel, that VTI shall make Mr. Morgenthaler available for his deposition no later than January 24 at a mutually agreed upon office of Defendants' counsel and that Defendants may file a supplemental brief of no more than 10 pages addressing Mr. Morgenthaler's opinions, and VTI's arguments based upon Mr. Morgenthaler's opinions, no later than two weeks after Mr. Morganthaler's deposition. The Court thereafter will issue its ruling on claim construction based on the parties' claim construction briefs.

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN,

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