MD Helicopters v. Aerometals, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MD HELICOPTERS, INC., No. 2:16-cv-02249-TLN-AC Plaintiff, v. ORDER AEROMETALS, INC., Defendant. 16 This matter is before the Court on Defendant Aerometals, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Disqualify Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher (“Gibson Dunn”) as Plaintiff’s Counsel. (ECF No. 177.) Plaintiff MD Helicopters, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) has filed an opposition (ECF No. 183), and Defendant has filed a reply (ECF No. 199). For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED. (ECF No. 177.) /// /// /// /// /// /// /// I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND From 2002 to 2005, Gibson Dunn represented Defendant extensively in four matters related to the instant case. (ECF No. 177-1 at 6.) The matters involved approximately 12 Gibson Dunn attorneys and 10 other timekeepers, and Gibson Dunn billed Defendant over $1.1 million in fees and costs. (Id. at 6–7.) First, in the early 2000s, Defendant…