Quintara Biosciences, Inc. v. Ruifeng Biztech Inc.
- William Alsup
- 3:20-cv-04808
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Quintara Biosciences v. Ruifeng Biztech, Judge Alsup denied provisional relief without prejudice but set a new trial date.
Quintara Biosciences, Inc., Ruifeng Biztech Inc., defendants’ counsel, and other people attending the trial.
What happened
Quintara Biosciences, Inc. asked the court to address the trial delay caused by defense attorney Kamath’s refusal to receive a COVID-19 vaccine.
Quintara requested that defense counsel be vaccinated, that defendants retain different trial counsel, or that the court disqualify counsel, strike defendants’ answer, and enter judgment for Quintara. The court did not reconsider its earlier decision to vacate the trial date.
Judge William Alsup denied Quintara’s motion for provisional relief without prejudice and scheduled a jury trial for May 16, 2022, with a final pretrial conference on May 11, 2022.
The detailed version
- Quintara Biosciences, Inc. v. Ruifeng Biztech Inc. · No. 3:20-cv-04808
- William Alsup
- Mar. 8, 2022
Background
A prior order denied defense counsel’s request to be exempted from the court’s requirement that people appearing in person for arguments and trial be fully vaccinated against COVID-19. That order vacated the trial date and allowed Quintara to file a motion for provisional relief based on sworn evidence.
Quintara’s Request
Quintara asked the court to order defendants’ counsel to become vaccinated within 60 days or require defendants to retain trial counsel who complied with the court’s vaccination order. Quintara also asked the court to disqualify Attorney Kamath, strike defendants’ answer, and enter default judgment for Quintara if counsel refused those options.
The court determined that Quintara was effectively seeking reconsideration of the earlier order vacating the trial date, rather than temporary relief based on the trial delay itself. The court stated that Quintara had not met its burden for reconsideration.
Ruling and Scheduling
The court denied Quintara’s motion for provisional relief without prejudice to filing a renewed motion addressing the delay imposed by defendants and their counsel. The court gave as an example a possible request requiring defendants to notify customers and vendors listed in the alleged database trade secrets about the lawsuit and the possibility that further dealings with defendants could create liability in light of the litigation.
The court also set a new jury trial for May 16, 2022, at 7:30 a.m., and a final pretrial conference for May 11, 2022, at 2:00 p.m. It stated that vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals could attend the trial in person with masking, social distancing, and other protocols to be determined.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.