IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

OWEN J. ROGAL, D.D.S., P.C., 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

SKILSTAF, INC., 

 Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 

3:06-cv-00711-MHT

OWEN J. ROGAL, D.D.S., P.C., 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

SKILSTAF, INC., 

 Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 

3:06-cv-00728-MHT

JOINT MOTION FOR AN ORDER PERMITTING THE PARTIES TO 

CONDUCT SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS OVER THE TELEPHONE

 Defendant Skilstaf, Inc. (“Defendant”) and Plaintiff Owen J. Rogal, D.D.S., 

P.C. (“Plaintiff”) (collectively, “the parties”), respectfully move the Court to grant 

an order permitting them to conduct the good faith settlement negotiations outlined 

in the Court’s Uniform Scheduling Order over the telephone. As grounds for this 

motion, the parties state as follows: 

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 43 Filed 05/31/2007 Page 1 of 4
2

1. On October 12, 2006, the Court entered a Uniform Scheduling Order 

in each of the above-styled cases. Section 3 of the Court’s Uniform Scheduling 

Order requires the parties to “conduct a face-to-face settlement conference at 

which counsel shall engage in good faith settlement negotiations” within twentyone (21) days after the deadline for the filing of dispositive motions. 

2. Plaintiff is a corporation with its principal place of business in 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 

3. Defendant is an Alabama corporation with its principal place of 

business in Alexander City, Alabama. 

4. Because Plaintiff is located in Pennsylvania and Defendant is located 

in Alabama, it will be difficult, costly, and inconvenient for the parties to engage in 

good faith settlement negotiations face-to-face. 

5. To date, the parties’ attorneys have already begun to engage in good 

faith settlement negotiations. Specifically, the parties’ attorneys have 

corresponded through the mail and have spoken on the telephone in an attempt to 

settle the disputes that exist between them. These settlement negotiations are 

ongoing. 

WHEREFORE, the parties hereby respectfully request the Court to permit 

them to continue conducting the good faith settlement negotiations outlined in the 

Court’s Uniform Scheduling Order over the telephone. 

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 43 Filed 05/31/2007 Page 2 of 4
3

Respectfully submitted, 

 s/Robert E. Cole 

Robert E. Cole 

437 Chestnut Street, Suite 218 

Philadelphia, PA 19109 

Telephone: (215) 922-2050 

Fascimile: (215) 922-2006 

recoleesq6@juno.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

 s/Charles A. Stewart III 

Charles A. Stewart III (STE067) 

Bradley Arant Rose & White LLP

The Alabama Center for Commerce 

401 Adams Avenue, Suite 780 

Montgomery, AL 36104 

Telephone: (334) 956-7700 

Facsimile: (334) 956-7701 

cstewart@bradleyarant.com

 s/Amelia T. Driscoll 

Amelia T. Driscoll (DRI016) 

Bradley Arant Rose & White LLP

1819 Fifth Avenue North 

Birmingham, AL 35203-2104 

Telephone: (205) 521-8000 

Facsimile: (205) 521-8800 

adriscoll@bradleyarant.com

Attorneys for Defendant 

Skilstaf, Inc. 

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 43 Filed 05/31/2007 Page 3 of 4
4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 31, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing 

with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification 

of such filing to the following: 

Robert E. Cole 

437 Chestnut Street, Suite 218 

Philadelphia, PA 19109 

Charles A. Stewart III 

Bradley Arant Rose & White LLP

The Alabama Center for Commerce 

401 Adams Avenue, Suite 780 

Montgomery, AL 36104 

Amelia T. Driscoll 

Bradley Arant Rose & White LLP

1819 Fifth Avenue North 

Birmingham, AL 35203-2104 

Beth A. Friel 

Jeanne L. Bakker 

Mongtomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads 

123 South Broad Street 

Philadelphia, PA 19109 

and I hereby certify that I have mailed by U. S. Postal Service the document to the 

following non-CM/ECF participants: None. 

/s/ Amelia T. Driscoll 

Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 43 Filed 05/31/2007 Page 4 of 4