According to Wikipedia, which is almost as good an authority on legal matters as The Laser Forum and Sailing Anarchy are...
In civil proceedings, magistrate judges typically manage discovery and other pretrial matters. They are authorized to issue orders in pretrial matters as long as the order is not dispositive of the case as a whole (such as an order granting summary judgment). They may also be assigned to write reports and recommendations to the district judge as to dispositive matters. With the consent of the parties, they may adjudicate civil cases in the same manner as a district judge, including presiding over jury or non-jury trials.
A change to the scheduling order on 8/6/14 has already bumped the trail ready date to what looks like January 2015 or later. The schedule change is in the status report link above.
Disclosure of Opening Expert Reports Friday November 7, 2014
Deposition on Opening Expert Report* Thursday, December 4, 2014
Disclosure of Rebuttal Export Reports Thursday, December 4, 2014
Deposition on Rebuttal Expert Report* Thursday, December 4, 2014
Close of All Discovery Friday, December 19, 2014
Filing of Dispositive Motions Monday, November 24, 2014
Joint Trial Memorandum The later of: (1) 30 days after a decision on
all dispositive motions or (2) Monday, December 15, 2014
Deadline to Serve Damage Analysis* Friday, November 21, 2014
Trial Ready Date 30 days after submission of Joint Trial
So the defendant is trying to delay as much as possible then. Hopefully the judge will show some steel and impose sanctions (or find against them by default) if they do not produce the required documentation.
Funny thing about trademarks. My company is going through a merger, and the new name of the combined company was supposed to be top-secret until everything was finalized. Only the new name, logo, and slogans are right there on the US patent and trademark office website for all to see. It's all listed under the existing company's name.
This suprises me. They filed a bunch of SEC paperwork before announcing the merger under a dummy corporation to hide it. Seems they could have done the same with trademarks. Maybe it's a red herring?
Looks like the lawsuit schedule has moved back again:
Docket Text: ORDER RE SCHEDULING: This case shall proceed pursuant to the following schedule. All discovery shall be completed by 12/19/2014. Dispositive motions shall be filed by 1/19/2015. Counterclaim defendant Performance Sailcraft Pty. Ltd. may renew its motion to dismiss on or before 1/19/2015. The parties' joint trial memorandum is due by 2/19/2015, or within 30 days of the Court's ruling on dispositive motions, whichever date is later. This case will be ready for trial by 3/19/2015. Please refer to Judge Meyer's webpage on the District of Connecticut website for Judge Meyer's "Pretrial Preferences" and "Trial Preferences," and for Judge Meyer's "Instructions for Discovery Disputes" and "Instructions for Joint Trial Memorandum."
Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 9/29/2014.(Norman, D.)
To those of you whose pay is based on your production: Don't you wish you had the luxury of delaying your decisions and actions whenever you don't feel right about something and yet continue to add your billable hours to the tab?
Hi Gantt, I've been following this discussion for a long time on that other forum... been very tempted at times to join, but I wouldn't have much to add to what you and Gouv are saying!
What personally bugs me probably the most is what ILCA did with the rule-change vote. I think it was the first time ever that I decided not to vote on something, as it was obvious from the start that they weren't telling the whole truth. The biggest "red flag" was that we were hurried to vote although there was several months of time to do it.
Somehow I am afraid that all that comes out of the whole affair by next spring is that LP has to pay something to Kirby, and everyone acts as if nothing had ever happened.