Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bryan Scott and Brenda Scott, Husband and Wife v. St. Jude Medical

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO


July 20, 2011

BRYAN SCOTT AND BRENDA SCOTT, HUSBAND AND WIFE, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
ST. JUDE MEDICAL, INC., A MINNESOTA CORPORATION,
ST. JUDE MEDICAL, NEUROMODULATIONS DIVISION, AND
ADVANCED NEUROMODULATION SYSTEMS, INC., A TEXAS CORPORATION D/B/A
ST. JUDE NEUROMODULATIONS SYSTEMS, INC., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: B. Lynn Winmill Chief U.S. District Court Judge

ORDER

The Court has before it a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel (Dkt. 21) and Motion for Extension of time to Respond to Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 22). Counsel for Plaintiff requests to withdraw as counsel of record.

NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that pursuant to District of Idaho Local Civil Rule 83.6, the Motion to Withdraw as Counsel (Dkt. 21) shall be, and the same is hereby GRANTED, and counsel is permitted to withdraw according to the following terms:

1. Withdrawing counsel shall continue to represent Plaintiff, pursuant to Dist. Idaho Loc. Civ. R. 83.6(c)(2) until proof of service of this Order on the client has been filed with the Court, or alternatively, until such time as Plaintiff notifies the Court in writing that it has received the Court's Order. The withdrawing attorney shall forthwith and with due diligence serve all other parties and either personally serve copies of the Order upon Plaintiff or mail the Order by first class mail, return receipt requested.

2. Plaintiff shall have twenty-one (21) days from the filing of the proof of service by the withdrawing attorney to file written notice with the Court stating how and by whom it will be represented.

3. Upon filing of proof of service on Plaintiff, no further proceedings can be had in this action that will affect Plaintiff's rights for a period of twenty-one (21) days. If Plaintiff fails to appear in this action, either in person or through a newly appointed attorney within that twenty-one (21) day period, such failure shall be grounds for dismissal of Plaintiff's claims with prejudice without further notice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Extension of time to Respond to Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 22) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs shall have until August 26, 2011 to file their response to the pending motion for summary judgment.

20110720

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.