Free Order on Motion to Seal - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 55.6 kB
Pages: 1
Date: October 7, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 404 Words, 2,440 Characters
Page Size: 572.64 x 846.24 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22896/31.pdf

Download Order on Motion to Seal - District Court of Connecticut ( 55.6 kB)


Preview Order on Motion to Seal - District Court of Connecticut
rr p y. @jC\} W W 5*/<
Case 3:03-cv-00966—A\/Q Document 31 Filed 10/07/20, Page»1 of 1
B 2 _§‘& d
o U Q Q ` I
gscl A
FU _ `
a ~ I Fll.,fZ0 .
zisé
gpg? Zllllltlllll-L1 P 3= 5**1
ig g Fg Q_, t UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ,
gl U JJ O DISTRICT OF co1s1i~1B1@fi‘IttUT ilqtllll p
g tg g 8 Ml/tlF0ll0, Cl. A
smc?
· o
U, g E ,0 ‘ PURDUE PHARMA L.P. g CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:03CV966(AW
ru ;;·, l
3 Q 2 as . .
U ,,4 tv Q_ Pla1nt1ff, )
gg §,.g > ,
G) ,_, ru 4,; vs. )
cu 4.> A )
§» E é ETHEX coRPoRAT1oN ) W I,
-I-J (I) -I-'
)
*·‘, ’°* "’ Defendant. ) . r ·
§ E, g 2 ) OCTOBER 4, 2004
q) U} -I-·‘
··l JJ O (D E .
4-> 0 f, O
2 O1 3 & EXPEDITED MOTION AND STIPULATION FOR SEALING OF SETTLEMENT
g r·· -;g fi t AGREEMENT FILED WITH STIPULATION AND ORDER
JJ H 4,,) L:
M B U) $
ni O O
35 gd 1; § IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between PLAINTIFF PURDUE
·|-J fj ` § S § jg g E PHARMA L.P. ("Plaintift") and DEFENDANT ETHEX CORPORATION
0) ·¤ O CD M \
M cv c>
§' g ,§ § Pg "` ("Defendant"), through their respective undersigned counsel, and, pursuant to Rule 7(b) ,
sa ra
Q 2 Q g E, of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties hereby move that the court
-I-> U) J,-J Ul U ,
5-• _ ··—| ·»-I
3 Q jj QS 5 Q immediately seal the Settlement Agreement filed on October l, 2004 in comiiection with
q) · 2 C O ·
_ g Q5 Z ‘§ E the parties’ Stipulation and Order. In support hereof, the parties represent asffollowsz
_ ~· -¤ eu va :¤
§ T-eu ; ; § 1. That on October 1, 2004, the parties filed a Stipulation and Order with
¤”~&° . ,
El E 2 gf the court whereby the parties agreed, inter alia, that all claims asserted
··* E ·"* 1 _ i;1..§¥,__,_;t
Q E § T; *2 *2 (56 V against Defendant were dismissed with prejudice and that the court
E O gr} O Q { pm., ,
Q H 0) »—l Ul t7...:e5 rg
cv ‘ Q Q ° F" I4?Zfti;;.»r
E 'g E *’° qv D ' ;.1;?;n,
‘° ° B 5 é Q l
Egzsz xae §3}~ M
¤· $*1 il E "··f=°· git ....
¤ 5 4.~ 0 8 tg
··-l . . `
.-1 c: ·—• § _
Q 45 2 g O 13
Lil -4 (D $-4 O 1
E-• Z3 ·-·| -16 "O 2
E an <1> .... ._l:>
u cv —• 4:: \.—a y
L9 cn rn cv u :11 A