Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

In re Lidoderm Antitrust Litigation, 3:14-md-02521 WHO. (2015)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20151020754 Visitors: 3
Filed: Oct. 19, 2015
Latest Update: Oct. 19, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING HEARING DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OR ALTERNATIVELY FOR PRECLUSION OF EVIDENCE AT SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND TRIAL (ECF No. 278). WILLIAM ORRICK , District Judge . The parties hereby stipulate, and respectfully request the Court to enter an order, resetting the hearing date and setting the briefing schedule with regard to Plaintiff's Motion for Production or Alternatively for Preclusion of Evidence at Summary Judgment and Trial
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING HEARING DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OR ALTERNATIVELY FOR PRECLUSION OF EVIDENCE AT SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND TRIAL (ECF No. 278).

The parties hereby stipulate, and respectfully request the Court to enter an order, resetting the hearing date and setting the briefing schedule with regard to Plaintiff's Motion for Production or Alternatively for Preclusion of Evidence at Summary Judgment and Trial (ECF No. 278) ("Motion"), as follows:

1. The hearing date and time of the Motion will be reset from November 10, 2015 to November 23, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor before the Honorable William H. Orrick in San Francisco, California.

2. Defendants' opposition to the Motion will be due on October 26, 2015; and

3. Plaintiffs' reply will be due on November 9, 2015.

These deadlines will not alter the date of any event or deadline fixed by Court order.

IT IS SO STIPULATED, through counsel of record.

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, THE FOREGOING 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