From Pacer, looky as DECN stalling in patent case.
"It appears the judge wants to finish this case...
while JNJ wishes to stall... "
Knowing how to read a docket entry can be helpful. For future reference:
A "stipulation" can be filed by either party. When you see that word it means that BOTH parties have agreed to something, NOT that one of them is asking the Court for something. It's an agreement between the parties that requires the Judge's acknowledgment and approval.
The actual document (Case 2:16-cv-00564-RFB-PAL Document 60 Filed 06/13/17) says the following:
Defendants LifeScan, Inc.; LifeScan Scotland, Ltd.; and Johnson and Johnson
(collectively, “LifeScan”) and Pharma Tech Solutions, Inc. and Decision IT Corp. (collectively,
“Pharma Tech”) (together with LifeScan, the “Parties”) file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order
to Modify Discovery Deadline and Briefing Schedule for Expedited Motion for Summary
Judgment. The Parties seek the following adjustments to the Court’s March 13, 2017 Order (D.I.
48) in order to provide additional time for expert depositions and to adjust the briefing schedule
for the expedited partial motion for summary judgment in this case:
• an extension of the discovery period until July 24, 2017;
• a two-week extension to submit LifeScan’s expedited motion for summary
judgment until July 24, 2017;
• a three-week extension to submit Pharma Tech’s response until August 28, 2017;
• a three-week extension to submit LifeScan’s reply until September 18, 2017.
With a REAL Pacer account the reading of the actual documents will tend to reduce the likelihood of the regular misinterpretation of the docket summary line and I wouldn't be out 40 cents.
"It appears the judge wants to finish this case...
while JNJ wishes to stall... "
Knowing how to read a docket entry can be helpful. For future reference:
A "stipulation" can be filed by either party. When you see that word it means that BOTH parties have agreed to something, NOT that one of them is asking the Court for something. It's an agreement between the parties that requires the Judge's acknowledgment and approval.
The actual document (Case 2:16-cv-00564-RFB-PAL Document 60 Filed 06/13/17) says the following:
Defendants LifeScan, Inc.; LifeScan Scotland, Ltd.; and Johnson and Johnson
(collectively, “LifeScan”) and Pharma Tech Solutions, Inc. and Decision IT Corp. (collectively,
“Pharma Tech”) (together with LifeScan, the “Parties”) file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order
to Modify Discovery Deadline and Briefing Schedule for Expedited Motion for Summary
Judgment. The Parties seek the following adjustments to the Court’s March 13, 2017 Order (D.I.
48) in order to provide additional time for expert depositions and to adjust the briefing schedule
for the expedited partial motion for summary judgment in this case:
• an extension of the discovery period until July 24, 2017;
• a two-week extension to submit LifeScan’s expedited motion for summary
judgment until July 24, 2017;
• a three-week extension to submit Pharma Tech’s response until August 28, 2017;
• a three-week extension to submit LifeScan’s reply until September 18, 2017.
With a REAL Pacer account the reading of the actual documents will tend to reduce the likelihood of the regular misinterpretation of the docket summary line and I wouldn't be out 40 cents.
