Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 26.7 kB
Pages: 2
Date: September 8, 2005
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 332 Words, 2,129 Characters
Page Size: 625.44 x 795.84 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/8646/31.pdf

Download Letter - District Court of Delaware ( 26.7 kB)


Preview Letter - District Court of Delaware
Case 1:O4—cv-01294-JJF Document 31 Filed O9/08/2005 Page 1 of 2
Murphy Spadaro & Landon
ATTORNEYS
1011 CENTRE ROAD, SUITE 21CI
WILMINGTON . DELAWARE 19805
PHONE 302.472.81OO
FAX 302.472.8].35
Francis J. Murphy
[email protected]
September 8, 2005
By Electronic Filing
The Honorable Joseph J. Faman, Jr.
District Court of Delaware
844 North King Street
Room 4209, Lock Box 18
Wilmington, DE 19801
Re: Flowserve Corporation v. Burns International Services Corporation and
Borg-Warner Corporation, C.A. No. 04-1294
Dear Judge Farnan:
I represent the Defendant.»'Cot1nterclaima11tBurns International Services
Corporation ("Burns") in the referenced matter. As is apparent from the docket, Bums
answered Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Flowserve Corporation’s ("Flowse1ve") Complaint and
tiled a Counterclaim against F lowsewe. Flowsewe moved to dismiss Counts IV and V of
Burns’ Counterclaim on March 1, 2005. It is my understanding that the Court has deferred
consideration of a Rule 16 scheduling order in light of the pending motion to dismiss.
We have been communicating with counsel for Flowsewe about further
proceedings in the case. F lowsen/e’s pending Motion to Dismiss is not completely case
dispositive, as it applies only to Counts IV and V of Burns’ Counterclaim. Therefore, Burns’
and Flowserve have agreed to engage in discovery, and have served interrogatories and

Case 1:04-cv-01294-JJF Document 31 Filed O9/08/2005 Page 2 of 2
The Honorable Joseph J. Farnan, Jr.
September 8, 2005
Page 2
document requests. In addition, Flowserve is in the process of obtaining documents from
non-parties in New York.
Bums and Flowserve are also discussing a proposed case scheduling order, in
light of the fact that the pending Motion to Dismiss is not completely case dispositive. The
patties anticipate that they will submit a proposed scheduling order to Your Honor in the near
future.
Respectfully yours,
/7 ' ..
Francis J. Murphy
FJl\/[fdla
Cc: Danielle K. Yearick, Esq. (by hand delivery)
Gregory E. Rogus, Esq. (by facsimile)
Clerk, United States District Court (by e-tile)
123711