United States of America v. Zurich Insurance Company et al

Filing 152

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 150 Stipulation filed by Zurich American Insurance Company, Steadfast Insurance Company. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte on October 26, 2010. (edllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/26/2010)

Download PDF
United States of America v. Zurich Insurance Company et al Doc. 152 Case3:08-cv-05005-MMC Document150 Filed10/21/10 Page1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Ethan A. Miller (State Bar No. 155965) David A. Gabianelli (State Bar No. 158170) Ethan H. Seibert (State Bar No. 232262) SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P. One Maritime Plaza, Suite 300 San Francisco, CA 94111-3492 Telephone: +1.415.954.0200 Facsimile: +1.415.393.9887 Email: eamiller@ssd.com Email: dgabianelli@ssd.com Email: eseibert@ssd.com Attorneys for Defendant ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY and Defendant and Counter-Claimant STEADFAST INSURANCE COMPANY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 14 Plaintiff, 15 vs. 16 17 18 19 20 STEADFAST INSURANCE COMPANY, 21 Counter-claimant, 22 vs. 23 24 25 Counter-defendant. 26 27 28 SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P. One Maritime Plaza, Suite 300 San Francisco, California 941113492 CASE NO. CV08-5005-MMC (EDL) JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING LIMITED REOPENING OF DISCOVERY Trial Date: February 28, 2011 ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY and STEADFAST INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants. THE PRESIDIO TRUST, a Wholly-Owned Corporation of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE LIMITED REOPENING OF DISCOVERY -CASE NO. CV08-5005-MMC (EDL) Dockets.Justia.com Case3:08-cv-05005-MMC Document150 Filed10/21/10 Page2 of 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 SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P. One Maritime Plaza, Suite 300 San Francisco, California 941113492 This stipulation for the limited reopening of discovery is being jointly made and submitted by Plaintiff United States of America and Counter Defendant The Presidio Trust (collectively referred to herein as "Plaintiff"), and Defendant Zurich American Insurance Company and Defendant/Counter-Claimant Steadfast Insurance Company (collectively, "Defendants"). WHEREAS, on October 4, 2010, Defendants filed a motion to compel certain depositions ("Motion") arising from the recent production of a document [Dkt. 133]; WHEREAS, at Plaintiff's request, Defendants withdrew the motion to allow for further meet and confer discussion [Dkt. 141]; WHEREAS, the parties agreed and stipulated to permit the re-opening of discovery to permit the subpoena of documents from U.C. Berkeley, per the three subpoenas issued by defendants' counsel on September 24, 2010, requesting depositions and production of documents on October 15, 2010 [Dkts. 140, 142]; and WHEREAS, Plaintiff informed Defendants on October 13, 2010 that Plaintiff would agree to Defendants' request to depose Prof. Byrne on the conditions concerning location, timing and duration described herein; It is AGREED AND STIPULATED by the parties, that the deposition of Professor Roger Byrne shall go forward as follows: 1. Defendants will be permitted to take the deposition of University of California ("UC"), Berkeley Professor Roger Byrne, for up to two hours maximum time; 2. Plaintiff will be permitted to ask questions of Professor Byrne at his deposition, for up to a maximum of two hours; 3. 4. The total length of Professor Byrne's deposition will not exceed four hours; The deposition will take place on a date mutually convenient for the witness and all counsel of record no later than November 5, 2010, subject to the availability of the witness; 5. The deposition will take place at Professor Byrne's office or a conference room at the UC, Berkeley campus to the extent such accommodations can be made with UC; 6. Also as a part of the Motion, Defendants requested a second deposition of someone with knowledge about the origin of the document at issue in the Motion. At the 1 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE LIMITED REOPENING OF DISCOVERY -CASE NO. CV08-5005-MMC (EDL) Case3:08-cv-05005-MMC Document150 Filed10/21/10 Page3 of 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 SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P. One Maritime Plaza, Suite 300 San Francisco, California 941113492 Plaintiff's request to be more specific about the second deposition requested as a part of Motion, Defendants requested the deposition of Carol Prince. Plaintiff has neither agreed nor disagreed to allow this second deposition to go forward. Instead, also at Plaintiff's request, the parties have agreed to revisit this matter after the deposition of Professor Byrne. Therefore, the deadline of October 15, 2010 for Defendants to renew their motion, previously mentioned in Dkt 140, no longer applies. Defendants shall have until: (a) five (5) days after the deposition of Prof. Byrne or (b) November 12, 2010, whichever is later, in which to file their renewed motion, if necessary. Defendants are not limited to requesting Carol Prince be the second deponent. After the deposition of Professor Byrne, the parties shall revisit who, if anyone, should sit for the second deposition sought in the Motion. IT IS SO STIPULATED. DATED: October 21, 2010 MELINDA L. HAAG United States Attorney By: /sJonathan U. Lee/ JONATHAN U. LEE Assistant U.S. Attorneys COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF DATED: October 21, 2010 SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P. By: /s/ David A. Gabianelli DAVID A. GABIANELLI Attorneys for Defendant ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY and Defendant and Counter-Claimant STEADFAST INSURANCE COMPANY PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: October 26, 2010 ________________________ ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE United States Magistrate Judge 2 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE LIMITED REOPENING OF DISCOVERY -CASE NO. CV08-5005-MMC (EDL)

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?