Salcedo et al v. Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company et al

Filing 12

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Bernard Zimmerman granting 11 Motion to continue case management conference (bzsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/27/2008)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
ATTORNEYS AT LAW 222 RUSH LANDING ROAD P O BOX 6169 NOVATO, CALIFORNIA 94948-6169 [phone]

ALAN R. BRAYTON, ESQ., S.B. #73685 DAVID R. DONADIO, ESQ., S.B. #154436 FRANK J. ANDERS, ESQ., S.B. #227208 BRAYTON~PURCELL LLP Attorneys at Law 222 Rush Landing Road P.O. Box 6169 Novato, California 94948-6169 [phone] [phone] (Fax No.) Attorneys for Plaintiffs UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION THEONI SALCEDO, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING AND DRY DOCK COMPANY, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. C 08-04381-BZ JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINE AND CONFERENCE, AND TO EXTEND TIME; [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY; [PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE] ORDER TO CONTINUE

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

BRAYTON~PURCELL LLP

Pursuant to Civil L. R. 7-11 and 7-12, the following parties hereby stipulate to, and respectfully move the Court for, an Order extending time as set forth in the Case Management Scheduling Order filed September 18, 2008, for the following good cause: On October 20, 2008, Defendants NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING AND DRY DOCK COMPANY, and NORTHROP GRUMMAN SHIP SYSTEMS, INC., filed a Notice to Tag Along Action regarding the pending Multidistrict Litigation ("MDL") in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, seeking among other things, to move Jurisdiction of this matter to that District (Document 6.) Defendants NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING AND DRY DOCK COMPANY, and NORTHROP GRUMMAN SHIP SYSTEMS, INC., have sent notice to tagalong to the clerk of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ("JPML") pursuant to 28
C:\Documents and Settings\USDC\Local Settings\Temp\notes56FD74\Stip stay or cont w Magistrate (Salcedo).wpd

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES

1

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

U.S.C. § 1407; said notice to the JPML from counsel being necessary to initiate the transfer process. On July 29, 1991, the JPML entered an order transferring all asbestos personal injury cases pending in the federal courts to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, for coordinated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. (In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation (no. VI). MDL No. 875., 771 F.Supp. 415 (1991)). That order also applies to "tag-along actions," or actions involving common questions of fact filed after January 17, 1991. Such actions are to be transferred to the eastern District of Pennsylvania as part of MDL 875, for coordinated pretrial proceedings. The JPML has held that a district court has the authority to stay pending a transfer order. In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1348, 1349 n.1 (J.P.M.L. 2001) ("[T]hose courts concluding that such issues should be addressed by the transferee judge need not rule on them, and the process of 1407 transfer in MDL-875 can continue without any unnecessary interruption or delay.") The parties agree that it is likely that the JPML will transfer this matter to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The Clerk of the JPML has not entered a Conditional Transfer Order pursuant to JPML Rule 12(a) or filed an order to show cause why the action should not be transferred, pursuant to JPML Rule 13(b). It is likely the dates set forth in the Case Management Scheduling Order including the deadlines imposed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 26, will pass before the Clerk of the JPML acts. The parties make this Motion on the grounds that a stay of this action would (a) promote judicial efficiency, (b) allow consistency in pretrial rulings, and (c) be most convenient to the parties. For the reasons above, the parties hereby STIPULATE to and respectfully request the Court VACATE its Case Management Scheduling Order and that the Court issue an Order STAYING this action pending the outcome of the MDL Panel's decision on the merits of the transfer. ////
C:\Documents and Settings\USDC\Local Settings\Temp\notes56FD74\Stip stay or cont w Magistrate (Salcedo).wpd

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES

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 28 //// //// //// //// //// ////

In the alternative, the parties hereby STIPULATE to and respectfully request that this Court vacate and continue the dates set forth in the Case Management Scheduling Order pending the outcome of the JPML's decision on the merits of the transfer. Dated: October 23, 2008 BRAYTON~PURCELL LLP /s/ David R. Donadio By: __________________________ David R. Donadio Attorneys for Plaintiffs Dated: October 23, 2008 HAIGHT BROWN AND BONESTEEL LLP /s/ Nairi Chakalian By: __________________________ Nairi Chakalian Daniel J. Kelly Attorneys for Defendant Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company and Defendant Northrop Grumman Ship Systems, Inc.

[PROPOSED]

ORDER TO STAY

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing date and deadlines specified in the Case Management Scheduling Order dated September 18, 2008, are hereby VACATED and that this action is STAYED pending the outcome of the JPML's decision on the merits of the transfer. Dated: _____________________ _____________________________ Bernard Zimmerman United States Magistrate Judge

C:\Documents and Settings\USDC\Local Settings\Temp\notes56FD74\Stip stay or cont w Magistrate (Salcedo).wpd

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES

3

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

[PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE] ORDER TO CONTINUE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing date and deadlines specified in the Case Management Scheduling Order dated September 18, 2008, are hereby VACATED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following case management deadlines are continued as follows: 1. The Case Management Conference is [set for a date after January 20, 2009 to

JANUARY 26 wit:] ____________________, 2009; at 4:00 p.m., Courtroom "G", 15th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California. 2. Last day to meet and confer re initial disclosures, early settlement, ADR process

selection, and discovery plan is 21 days before the Case Management Conference in paragraph 1, above. 3. Last day to file Joint ADR Certification with Stipulation to ADR process or

Notice of Need for ADR Phone Conference is 21 days before the Case Management Conference in paragraph 1, above. 4. Last day to complete initial disclosures or state objection to Rule 26(f) Report,

file/serve Case Management Statement and file/serve Rule 26(f) Report is 5 court days before the Case Management Conference in paragraph 1, above. OCTOBER 27, 2008 Dated: _____________________ _____________________________ Bernard Zimmerman United States Magistrate Judge

C:\Documents and Settings\USDC\Local Settings\Temp\notes56FD74\Stip stay or cont w Magistrate (Salcedo).wpd

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES

4