Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-07164/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-07164-19/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: Environmental Matters

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 This disposition is not designated for publication in the official reports. 1

Case No. CV 06-07164 JF (PVT)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO DEFER RULING ON THE GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT

AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO FILE ADDITIONAL BRIEFING OR EVIDENCE

(JFLC1)

**E-Filed 7/21/2010**

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

TYCO THERMAL CONTROLS LLC,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

REDWOOD INDUSTRIALS, et al.,

 Defendants.

ROWE INDUSTRIES, INC.,

 Counter-Claimant,

 v.

TYCO THERMAL CONTROLS, LLC,

 Counter-Defendant.

Case Number C 06-07164 JF (PVT)

Related Case No. C 10-01606 JF (PVT)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 1

REQUEST TO DEFER RULING ON

THE GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT

AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

REQUEST TO FILE ADDITIONAL

BRIEFING OR EVIDENCE

Re: Docket No. 225

On July 16, 2010, Plaintiff Tyco Thermal Controls LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed a letter

requesting that the Court defer issuing an order on the pending motions for approval of good

faith settlement for a period of ten days from the date of the hearing on the motions, which was

July 16, 2010. Plaintiff asserts that this request will allow it to meet and confer with the settlingCase 3:06-cv-07164-NC Document 227 Filed 07/21/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Case No. CV 06-07164 JF (PVT)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO DEFER RULING ON THE GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT

AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO FILE ADDITIONAL BRIEFING OR EVIDENCE

(JFLC1)

defendants with respect to the disputed issues raised at the hearing on the motions. Plaintiff’s

request to defer the ruling for the proposed ten-day period is GRANTED. 

Plaintiff also requests leave to file additional briefing or evidence with respect to the

content of the parties’ settlement discussions. Plaintiff already has filed several memoranda and

presented substantial oral argument in support of its position. Accordingly, the Court concludes

that the motions are appropriate for determination without further briefing or additional evidence. 

Plaintiff’s request to submit additional briefing or evidence is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 7/21/2010

____________________________

JEREMY FOGEL

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-07164-NC Document 227 Filed 07/21/10 Page 2 of 2