throbber
Case 3:18-cv-00347-CAB-MDD Document 254-2 Filed 01/29/20 PageID.22944 Page 1 of 5
`
`
`NIMALKA R. WICKRAMASEKERA (SBN: 268518)
`nwickramasekera@winston.com
`DAVID P. DALKE (SBN: 218161)
`ddalke@winston.com
`LEV TSUKERMAN (SBN: 319184)
`ltsukerman@winston.com
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`333 S. Grand Avenue
`Los Angeles, CA 90071-1543
`Telephone: (213) 615-1700
`Facsimile: (213) 615-1750
`
`BRIAN J. NISBET (Pro Hac Vice)
`bnisbet@winston.com
`SARANYA RAGHAVAN (Pro Hac Vice)
`sraghavan@winston.com
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`35 West Wacker Drive
`Chicago, IL 60601-9703
`Telephone: (312) 558-5600
`Facsimile: (312) 558-5700
`
`CORINNE STONE HOCKMAN (Pro Hac Vice)
`chockman@winston.com
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`1111 Louisiana Street, 25th Floor
`Houston, TX 77002-5242
`Telephone: (713) 651-2600
`Facsimile: (713) 651-2700
`
`Attorneys for Defendants
`ALPHATEC HOLDINGS, INC. AND ALPHATEC SPINE, INC.
`
`
`
`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
`27
`28
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SAN DIEGO DIVISION
`Case No. 3:18-CV-00347-CAB-MDD
`NUVASIVE, INC., a Delaware
`corporation,
`
`
`[Assigned to Courtroom 4C – Honorable
`Cathy Ann Bencivengo]
`
`
`DECLARATION OF BRIAN J.
`v.
`NISBET IN SUPPORT OF
`
`DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR FEES
`ALPHATEC HOLDINGS, INC., a
`AND COSTS
`Delaware corporation and ALPHATEC
`
`SPINE, INC., a California corporation,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF BRIAN J. NISBET ISO ALPHATEC’S
`
`MOTION FOR FEES AND COSTS
`
`
`
`
`
`CASE NO. 3:18-CV-00347-CAB-MDD
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-00347-CAB-MDD Document 254-2 Filed 01/29/20 PageID.22945 Page 2 of 5
`
`
`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
`27
`28
`
`I, Brian J. Nisbet, declare as follows:
`1.
`I am a partner with the law firm of Winston & Strawn LLP, counsel of
`record for Defendants Alphatec Holdings, Inc. and Alphatec Spine, Inc. (individually
`and collectively, “Alphatec”). I have personal knowledge of the following facts and, if
`called as a witness, I could and would testify competently thereto.
`2.
`Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of the transcript of the hearing on
`NuVasive’s motion dated December 12, 2019.
`3.
`Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of the invoice reflecting the fees and
`costs Alphatec incurred in responding to NuVasive’s motion in December 2019 (Doc.
`No. 218.)
`4.
`On December 12, 2019, the Court denied NuVasive’s Ex Parte Motion for
`Protective Order and Appointment of Special Master. (Doc. No. 232.) The Court also
`sanctioned NuVasive and awarded Alphatec its fees and costs associated with
`responding to NuVasive’s motion. (Doc. No. 232.)
`5.
`Over the past several weeks, I have attempted in good faith to resolve the
`fees and costs dispute between Alphatec and NuVasive with Mike Hilgers of Hilgers
`Graben PLLC. Mr. Hilgers is counsel for NuVasive. Though the dialogue was
`productive, NuVasive ultimately failed or refused to provide any offer to settle the issue
`of Alphatec’s fees and costs.
`6.
`I summarize below the time I have spent negotiating on behalf of Alphatec,
`which is in addition to the time reflected in Exhibit 2.
`7.
`On December 13, 2019, Mr. Hilgers contacted me by telephone on behalf
`of NuVasive to see whether there would be potential interest in resolving the sanctions
`dispute between Alphatec and NuVasive. We spoke for approximately 6 minutes.
`8.
`On January 6, 2020, I spoke with Mr. Hilgers for approximately 10 minutes
`to relay the fees and costs Alphatec incurred in responding to NuVasive’s motion. I
`also spoke with Mr. Craig Hunsaker, Alphatec’s General Counsel, for approximately
`25 minutes about resolving the sanctions dispute.
`1
`
`DECLARATION OF BRIAN J. NISBET ISO ALPHATEC’S
`
`MOTION FOR FEES AND COSTS
`
`
`
`CASE NO. 3:18-CV-00347-CAB-MDD
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-00347-CAB-MDD Document 254-2 Filed 01/29/20 PageID.22946 Page 3 of 5
`
`
`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
`27
`28
`
`9.
`On January 8, 2020, I spoke with Mr. Hilgers for approximately 17 minutes
`and continued negotiations over the fees and costs dispute.
`10. On January 10, 2020, I spoke with Mr. Hilgers for approximately 1 hour
`and continued negotiations over the fees and costs dispute. I also spoke again with Mr.
`Hunsaker about this issue for approximately 10 minutes.
`11. On January 13, 2020, I spoke with Mr. Hilgers for approximately 10
`minutes and continued negotiations over the fees and costs dispute. I also spoke again
`with Mr. Hunsaker about this issue for approximately 10 minutes.
`12. On January 15, 2020, I spoke with Mr. Hilgers for approximately 10
`minutes about the fees and costs dispute. At that point, Mr. Hilgers and I concluded
`that it was not likely the parties would be able to resolve the dispute and that Alphatec
`would have to press forward and seek relief from the Court. NuVasive still has not
`provided any offer to cover Alphatec’s fees and costs associated with responding to
`NuVasive’s motion.
`13.
`In addition to these conversations, since the time reflected in Exhibit 2 to
`Alphatec’s motion, I have spent an additional approximately 15 hours reviewing bills,
`responding to correspondences from Mr. Hilgers, drafting Alphatec’s motion for fees
`and costs, and drafting this declaration.
`14. My billable rate is $860.00, as reflected in Exhibit 2.
`15. Thus, the total time I spent attempting to resolve this dispute with Mr.
`Hilgers, reviewing bills, drafting Alphatec’s motion, and drafting this declaration is
`approximately 17.6 hours. At an hourly rate of $860.00, approximately $15,164.66
`should be added to the figure in Exhibit 2.
`16. Also, I understand that Nimalka Wickramasekera, lead counsel for
`Alphatec, has spent approximately 1.2 hours conferring about and revising Alphatec’s
`motion for fees and costs. Her billable rate is $1,005.00, as reflected in Exhibit 2. At
`an hourly rate of $1,005.00, approximately $1,206.00 should be added to the figure in
`Exhibit 2.
`
`DECLARATION OF BRIAN J. NISBET ISO ALPHATEC’S
`
`MOTION FOR FEES AND COSTS
`
`2
`
`
`
`CASE NO. 3:18-CV-00347-CAB-MDD
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-00347-CAB-MDD Document 254-2 Filed 01/29/20 PageID.22947 Page 4 of 5
`
`
`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
`27
`28
`
`17.
`In sum, Alphatec’s total fees and costs associated with responding to
`NuVasive’s motion are $242,118.80.
`18.
` I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California
`and the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this
`29th day of January, 2020, at Chicago, Illinois.
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/Brian J. Nisbet
`BRIAN J. NISBET
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF BRIAN J. NISBET ISO ALPHATEC’S
`
`MOTION FOR FEES AND COSTS
`
`3
`
`
`
`CASE NO. 3:18-CV-00347-CAB-MDD
`
`

`

`Case 3:18-cv-00347-CAB-MDD Document 254-2 Filed 01/29/20 PageID.22948 Page 5 of 5
`
`
`Exhibit
`1
`2
`
`TABLE OF EXHIBITS
`
`
`Page Nos.
`5-26
`27-37
`
`
`
`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
`27
`28
`
`DECLARATION OF BRIAN J. NISBET ISO ALPHATEC’S
`
`MOTION FOR FEES AND COSTS
`
`4
`
`
`
`CASE NO. 3:18-CV-00347-CAB-MDD
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket