Free Other Notice - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3

LANG & BAKER, PLC
8767 VIA DE COMMERCIO, SUITE 102 SCOTTSDALE, ARIZONA 85258 TELEPHONE (480) 947-1911

WILLIAM G. KLAIN, #015851
4

Attorneys for Defendants/Counterclaimant
5 6 7 8 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA QC CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NO. CV03-1997 PHX ROS

10

v.
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

COHILL'S BUILDING SPECIALTIES, INC., and MICHAEL COHILL, Defendants. ________________________________________ COHILL'S BUILDING SPECIALTIES, INC., an Arizona corporation, Counterclaimant, v. QC CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Counterdefendant. ________________________________________

DEFENDANTS'/COUNTERCLAIMANT'S NOTICE RE: NEED FOR SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE JUDGE

Defendant/Counterclaimant Cohill's Building Specialties, Inc. ("Cohills") and Defendant Timothy Cohill ("Cohill")1, pursuant to this Court's Order dated June 7, 2006, by and through their counsel undersigned, hereby notify the Court as follows with respect to the need for a District Court Judge to conduct a settlement conference: Cohills and Cohill submit the instant Notice unilaterally. Counsel undersigned telephoned Plaintiff/Counterdefendant's counsel's office on the date of this filing in order to secure his participation in the drafting and filing of this Notice, but was advised that Plaintiff/Counterdefendant's counsel is away from his office for the entire week and his assistant is away for this day. Case 2:03-cv-01997-ROS Document 136 Filed 08/14/2006 Page 1 of 2
1

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

1.

Counsel undersigned and counsel for Plaintiff/Counterdefendant QC Construction

Products, LLC ("QC") have discussed whether the conduct of a settlement conference by a District Court Judge would be conducive toward achieving a settlement and concluded, based upon the vastness of the apparent monetary gap needed to be bridged between the parties, that any such effort would likely fail to result in a settled resolution of this matter; and 2. Counsel undersigned notes his further belief that he cannot fully evaluate and

advise this Court of the probability that a settlement conference might result in a settlement of this matter as he has yet to receive any rebuttal expert report from QC as required to comprehend QC's position and analysis with respect to the computation of Cohills' damages as set forth in Cohills' expert's report. Cohills and Cohill intend to raise with the Court, separate from the instant Notice, QC's failure to disclose its rebuttal expert report and any appropriate sanctions for such failure. DATED this 14th day of August, 2006. LANG & BAKER, PLC

By

/s/ William G. Klain William G. Klain 8767 E. Via De Ventura, Suite 102 Scottsdale, Arizona 85258 (480) 947-1911 Attorneys for Defendants/Counterclaimant

Copy of the foregoing mailed this 14th day of August, 2006, to: Russell K. Ryan, Esquire Motschiedler Michaelides & Wishon LLP 1690 West Shaw Avenue; Suite 200 Fresno, California 93711 Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counterdefendant

By:

Cheryl Robinson

L:\Cohills\QC\Pleadings\Notice re Need for Settlement Conf Judge.wpd

Case 2:03-cv-01997-ROS

2 Document 136

Filed 08/14/2006

Page 2 of 2