Reeder et al v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

Filing 119

corrected ORDER (tf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/15/2009)

Download PDF
Case3:07-cv-00538-SI Document117 Filed09/08/09 Page1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 REBECCA EISEN, State Bar No. 096129 THERESA MAK, State Bar No. 211435 MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP One Market, Spear Street Tower San Francisco, CA 94105-1126 reisen@morganlewis.co m tmak@morganlewis.com Tel: 415.442.1000 Fax: 415.442.1001 Attorneys for Defendant METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION MICHELLE ALVES, DONALD MYERS, and DANIEL CABALLERO, Plaintiffs, Case No. CV 07-00538 SI JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Date: Time: Judge: September 15, 2009 11:00 A.M.. Hon. Susan Illston 14 vs. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. Pursuant to this Court's July 31, 2009 Minute Order, Plaintiffs Michelle Alves, Donald Myers, and Daniel Caballero ("Plaint iffs") and Defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company ("Defendant") (together, the "Parties") jo int ly submit this Case Management Statement and Proposed Order and respectfully request that the Court take the current case management conference, set for September 15, 2009, off calendar. As this court is aware, on June 5, 2007, a stipulated stay o f this matter was entered pending resolut ion of the related matter of Weinstein, et. al. v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., et. al., Case No. 06-cv-04444 (SI) (the "Weinstein Act ion"). Specifically, the stipulation provided that "Reeder Act ion should be stayed throughout the pendency of the Weinstein Act ion and such stay should be lifted only after the Weinstein Action is dismissed, or otherwise fully adjudicated . 1 DB2/21299062.1 Case No. 07-00538 (SI) JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case3:07-cv-00538-SI Document117 Filed09/08/09 Page2 of 2 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 . . ." Reeder Docket Entry #58 (emphasis added). On July 31, 2009, this Court entered a Final Approval Order and Judgment Approving Settlement ("Final Approval Order") in the Weinstein Act ion. Weinstein Docket Entry # 220. That Final Approval Order became effect ive on August 31, 2009. Two of the original named plaintiffs in this action ­ Kim Reeder and Elmo Cash ­ participated in the Weinstein settlement and by operation of the Final Approval Order, have released all of their claims against MetLife. The remaining three original named plaintiffs ­ Michele Alves, Donald Myers, and Daniel Caballero ­ each opted out of the Weinstein settlement. See Weinstein Docket Entry # 220. Since opting-out, and following the Court's July 31, 2009 Minute Order, the parties have finalized and agreed to the terms of a settlement agreement (which includes a confidentiality clause). A Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), seeking the Court's approval to dismiss this action, will be filed by no later than October 20, 2009. In light of this, the parties respectfully request that the Court continue the current case management conference, set for September 15, 2009, to November 3, 2009 at 11:00 a.m. or a date convenient to the Court. DATED: September 8, 2009 SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC /s/ (With Permission) MATTHEW BAINER Attorneys for Michele Alves, Donald Myers, and Daniel Caballero DATED: September 8, 2009 MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP /s/ _____ M. MICHAEL COLE Attorneys for Defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company [PROPOSED] ORDER The current case management conference, set for September 15, 2009, is continued to 9 13 3:00 November 3, 2009 at 11:00 a.m. Dated: ____________, 2009 By: ______________________________________ Hon. Susan Illston, USDJ 2 Case No. 07-00538 (SI) 28 DB2/21299062.1 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

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?