Opinion
Case No. 1:10-CV-00674-OWW-JLT
08-09-2011
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, a New York corporation; and GE WIND ENERGY, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Plaintiffs, v. THOMAS WILKINS, an individual, Defendant.
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE & DORR LLP WILLIAM F. LEE (admitted pro hac vice ) RICHARD W. O'NEILL (admitted pro hac vice ) ELIZABETH M. REILLY (admitted pro hac vice ) LOUIS W. TOMPROS (admitted pro hac vice ) ADAM S. GERSHENSON (admitted pro hac vice ) ALEX C. BOUDREAU (admitted pro hac vice ) WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE & DORR LLP ANDREA JEFFRIES (State Bar No. 180408) Lowell T. Carruth, # 034065 McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP Attorneys for Plaintiffs GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY AND GE WIND ENERGY, LLC
(SPACE BELOW FOR FILING STAMP ONLY)
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE & DORR LLP
WILLIAM F. LEE (admitted pro hac vice)
RICHARD W. O'NEILL (admitted pro hac vice)
ELIZABETH M. REILLY (admitted pro hac vice)
LOUIS W. TOMPROS (admitted pro hac vice)
ADAM S. GERSHENSON (admitted pro hac vice)
ALEX C. BOUDREAU (admitted pro hac vice)
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE & DORR LLP
ANDREA JEFFRIES (State Bar No. 180408)
Lowell T. Carruth, # 034065
McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard,
Wayte & Carruth LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY AND
GE WIND ENERGY, LLC
ORDER RE: GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY AND GE WIND ENERGY LLC'S MOTION TO DISMISS
(DOCKET NO. 192)
Plaintiffs General Electric Company and GE Wind Energy LLC's Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 192) came on regularly for hearing on June 27, 2011. Appearing on behalf of the Plaintiff, GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, were Lowell T. Carruth and Andrea W. Jeffries. Appearing on behalf of Defendant Thomas Wilkins was William C. Hahesy. Appearing on behalf of Intervenor, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. and Mitsubishi Power Systems Americas, Inc., was Steven J. Barber. The Court heard argument from counsel. The Court, after reviewing all points and authorities submitted on behalf of all parties and oral argument, issues the Order attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein as if set forth in full. Specifically,
1. Defendant's conversion and unjust enrichment counterclaims are DISMISSED, without prejudice; and
2. Defendant shall file an amended counterclaim within fifteen days following electronic service of this memorandum decision. Plaintiff shall file its reply within fifteen days following service of any amended counterclaim.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Oliver W. Wanger
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE