Espindola v. Standard Insurance Company et al

Filing 20

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 5/2/2017 ORDERING dates set forth in the Court's 11/21/2016 Order are CONTINUED as follows: Plaintiff Dedra Espindola's motion for summary judgment in this ERISA matter sh all be filed by 6/9/2017; Defendant Standard Insurance Company's opposition and cross-motion shall be filed by 6/30/2017; Plaintiff's reply and opposition shall be filed by 7/21/2017; Defendant's reply shall be filed by 8/4/2017; Hearing on the parties' cross-motions is CONTINUED from 7/25/2017 at 1:30 p.m. to 8/22/2017 at 1:30 p.m. (Becknal, R)

Download PDF
1 Linda M. Lawson (Bar No. 77130) llawson@mmhllp.com 2 Charles K. Chineduh (Bar No. 273258) cchineduh@mmhllp.com 3 MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES LLP 800 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 500 4 Los Angeles, California 90017-2611 Telephone: (213) 620-0300 5 Facsimile: (213) 625-1930 6 Attorneys for Defendant STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEDRA ESPINDOLA, Case No. 2:16-cv-01301-JAM-CKD 12 STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DATES; ORDER THEREON 13 14 15 16 ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY ) and DST SYSTEMS, INC., LONG TERM ) ) DISABILITY PLAN, ) ) Defendants. ) Judge: Hon. John A. Mendez 17 Plaintiff Dedra Espindola (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Standard Insurance 18 19 Company (“Defendant” or “Standard”), currently the only named defendant in the 20 above-entitled action,1 by and through their respective attorneys of record, enter into 21 this stipulation based on the following facts: 22 On June 13, 2016, Plaintiff filed her Complaint in this lawsuit. 23 On November 21, 2016, the Court issued a Minute Order (“November 21 24 Order”) (ECF Doc. No. 18), which indicated that the Court determined “this ERISA 25 26 1 Defendant DST Systems, Inc., Long Term Disability Plan was dismissed without prejudice. See Order re Stipulation to Dismiss DST Systems, Inc., Long 27 Term Disability Plan, dated 08/10/16. (ECF Doc. No. 14.) 28 LAW OFFICES 1 MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES LLP 156244.1 Case No. 2:16-cv-01301-JAM-CKD STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DATES; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON 1 matter should proceed on cross motions for summary judgment,” and which set forth 2 a schedule of pretrial and trial dates, including the following: 1. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment: filed on or before May 12, 5 2. Standard’s opposition and cross-motion: filed on or before June 2, 2017; 6 3. Plaintiff’s reply and opposition: filed on or before June 23, 2017; 7 4. Standard’s reply: filed on or before July 7, 2017; 8 5. Hearing on cross-motions: July 25, 2017 at 1:30 p.m. 9 On February 1, 2017, the parties participated in a mediation session before 3 4 2017; 10 Keith M. Parker, Esq., ADR Services, Inc. The parties are continuing to actively explore settlement possibilities, and wish 11 12 to fully exhaust those possibilities prior to filing their respective cross-motions. The parties have not previously requested the continuance of any dates set 13 14 forth in the November 21 Order. WHEREAS, for good cause, for the convenience of the Court, and to conserve 15 16 both the Court’s and the parties’ time and resources while allowing the parties to 17 fully explore settlement possibilities, the parties stipulate to, and respectfully request, 18 a continuance of the following pretrial and trial dates set forth in the November 21 19 Order by 28 days, as set forth below. 20 STIPULATION The parties agree and stipulate, and respectfully request, the following 28-day 21 22 continuances of dates set forth in the Court’s November 21, 2016 Order: 1. 23 Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in this ERISA matter will be 24 filed on or before June 9, 2017; 2. 25 Standard’s opposition and cross-motion will be filed on or before 26 June 30, 2017; 27 3. Plaintiff’s reply and opposition will be filed on or before July 21, 2017; 28 4. Standard’s reply will be filed on or before August 4, 2017; LAW OFFICES 2 MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES LLP 156244.1 Case No. 2:16-cv-01301-JAM-CKD STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DATES; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON 5. 1 The hearing on the parties’ cross-motions is continued to August 22, 2 2017 at 1:30 p.m. 3 IT IS SO STIPULATED 4 5 6 Dated: May 1, 2017 7 KANTOR & KANTOR, LLP Glenn R. Kantor Alan E. Kassan Brent Dorian Brehm 8 9 By: /s/ Brent Dorian Brehm Brent Dorian Brehm Attorneys for Plaintiff DEDRA ESPINDOLA 10 11 12 13 Dated: May 1, 2017 14 MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES LLP Linda M. Lawson Charles K. Chineduh 15 By: /s/ Charles K. Chineduh Charles K. Chineduh Attorneys for Defendant STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 16 17 18 19 Filer’s Attestation-Local Rule 131(e) 20 The filing attorney attests that he has obtained concurrence regarding the filing 21 22 of this document and its content from the signatories to this document. 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// LAW OFFICES 3 MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES LLP 156244.1 Case No. 2:16-cv-01301-JAM-CKD STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DATES; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON 1 ORDER Based on the parties’ Stipulation and good cause appearing, the following 2 3 dates set forth in the Court’s November 21, 2016 Order are continued as follows: 1. 4 Plaintiff Dedra Espindola’s motion for summary judgment in this 5 ERISA matter shall be filed on or before June 9, 2017; 2. 6 Defendant Standard Insurance Company’s opposition and cross-motion 7 shall be filed on or before June 30, 2017; 8 3. Plaintiff’s reply and opposition shall be filed on or before July 21, 2017; 9 4. Defendant’s reply shall be filed on or before August 4, 2017; 10 5. Hearing on the parties’ cross-motions is continued from July 25, 2017 at 11 1:30 p.m. to August 22, 2017 at 1:30 p.m. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 14 Dated: May 2, 2017 15 /s/ John A. Mendez____________ Hon. John A Mendez United States District Court Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LAW OFFICES 4 MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES LLP 156244.1 Case No. 2:16-cv-01301-JAM-CKD STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DATES; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?