`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
`
`
`
`
`
`DRONE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`14cv0111
`ELECTRONICALLY FILED
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`PARROT S.A., PARROT, INC.,
`Defendants.
`
`ORDER OF COURT DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL ATTENDANCE
`AT THE ADR OF A DECISION MAKER WHO HAS FULL SETTLEMENT
`AUTHORITY (DOC. NO. 49)
`
`Presently before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel in which Plaintiff moves this
`
`
`
`Court to find that Defendants’ designated representative for ADR, David Gaul, is not an
`
`individual “who has full settlement authority and who is knowledgeable about the facts of the
`
`case” as required by the ADR Policies and Procedures of the United States District Court for the
`
`Western District of Pennsylvania. Doc. No. 49. Defendants contend that Mr. Gaul, Parrot Inc.’s
`
`CFO, is an appropriate ADR representative. Doc. No. 53. After review of the Motion and
`
`related briefs, on the 8th day of July, 2014, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
`
`1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Attendance at the ADR of a Decision Maker Who Has Full
`
`Settlement Authority (Doc. No. 49) is DENIED; and
`
`2. After the ADR Session, either Party may petition the Court to order that the other bear
`
`the costs of a second ADR session if the other Party fails to bring a representative “who
`
`has full settlement authority and who is knowledgeable about the facts of the case.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`s/ Arthur J. Schwab
`Arthur J. Schwab
`United States District Judge
`
`
`
`cc:
`
`All Registered ECF Counsel and Parties