Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd.

District Court, N.D. California·Decided January 26, 2022·No. 4:19-cv-06593·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES Case No. 19-cv-06593-HSG CORPORATION, et al., 8 ORDER VACATING JURY TRIAL Plaintiffs, DATE, SETTING CASE 9 MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND v. PERMITTING REFILING OF 10 DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR MERIL LIFE SCIENCES PVT. LTD., et al., SUMMARY JUDGMENT 11 Defendants. 12 13 Given the complexity of the case and the parties’ numerous outstanding disputes, the Court 14 VACATES the jury trial currently scheduled to begin on February 7, 2022. The Court SETS a 15 further telephonic case management conference on January 31, 2022 at 11:00 a.m. All counsel 16 shall use the following dial-in information to access the call: 17 Dial-In: 888-808-6929; 18 Passcode: 6064255 19 For call clarity, parties shall NOT use speaker phone or earpieces for these calls, and where at all 20 possible, parties shall use landlines. 21 In advance of the January 31 Case Management Conference, the parties are directed to 22 meet and confer to discuss their availability for a trial this spring. The Court intends to set the trial 23 to begin on one of these dates: 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 2 3 4 The Court has also reconsidered its prior denial of Defendants’ Administrative Motion for 5 || Leave to File Second Motion for Summary Judgment. See Dkt. No. 200. In light of the parties’ 6 || persistent disputes regarding core legal questions, the Court finds that granting Defendant leave to 7 file the proposed second motion for summary judgment may clarify and streamline the issues to be g || tried, and thus advance the “just, speedy, and inexpensive” resolution of this lawsuit. See Hoffman 9 v. Tonnemacher, 593 F.3d 908, 911 (9th Cir. 2010). The Court accordingly finds good cause to 19 || Consider the merits of Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment of No Damages. See Civil Standing Order 4 21; Dkt. No. 214. If Defendant wishes to renew this motion, it must refile the

= 12 documents previously filed as Dkt. No. 214, without modification other than changing the noticed E 13 hearing date, by 5:00 p.m. on January 26. In advance of the January 31 Case Management 14. || Conference, the parties are further directed to meet and confer and agree on a briefing schedule on 3 15 the motion, with briefing to be complete no later than one month from the date of this Order. The 16 || Court will then schedule a hearing on the motion if necessary. IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 1g || Dated: 1/26/2022 19 Abepunrd 3 Sb). HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. 20 United States District Judge 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., (N.D. Cal. 2022).

Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. (Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hoffman v. Tonnemacher
593 F.3d 908 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)