Mackey v. Aetna Life Insurance Company et al

Filing 39

ORDER re 38 Stipulation filed by Alicia Mackey, Set/Reset Deadlines as to 38 Stipulation.Cross Motions due by 5/11/2011. Responses due by 5/25/2011. Replies due by 6/1/2011. Motion Hearing set for 6/17/2011 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. Case Management Conference set for 6/17/2011 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 19th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 12/14/2010. (be, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/16/2010)

Download PDF
1 Glenn R. Kantor, State Bar No. 122643 gkantor@kantorlaw.net 2 Peter S. Sessions, State Bar No. 193301 psessions@kantorlaw.net 3 KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street 4 Northridge, California 91324 Telephone: (818) 886-2525 5 Facsimile: (818) 350-6272 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff ALICIA MACKEY 7 Katherine L. Kettler, State Bar No. 231586 8 klk@millerlawgroup.com Jennifer A. Shy, State Bar No. 131074 9 jas@millerlawgroup.com MILLER LAW GROUP P.C. 10 111 Sutter Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, CA 94104 11 Telephone: (415) 464-4300 Facsimile: (415) 464-4336 12 Attorneys for Defendant 13 INTEL CORPORATION LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN 14 15 16 17 18 19 ALICIA MACKEY, 20 21 22 vs. Plaintiff, Case No. CV 09-2288 CRB STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE SCHEDULE FOR CROSSMOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 23 AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; INTEL TOTAL COMPENSATION AND 24 BENEFIT PACKAGE; INTEL CORPORATION LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN, 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE SCHEDULE FOR CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Case No. CV 09-2288 CRB Defendants. 1 The parties to this action, Plaintiff Alicia Mackey and Defendant Intel 2 Corporation Long Term Disability Plan (collectively "the parties"), through their respective 3 attorneys of record, hereby stipulate and agree to the following: 4 5 1. This is an action for long term disability ("LTD") benefits under an 6 employee welfare benefit plan regulated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act 7 of 1974, 29 U.S.C. 1001 et seq. ("ERISA"). 8 9 2. The Court has previously set a schedule for cross-motions for summary 10 judgment in this case, in which the parties would file their opening briefs on January 14, 11 2011, opposition briefs on January 28, 2011, reply briefs on February 4, 2011, with a 12 hearing set for February 18, 2011, at 10:00 a.m. (see Docket No. 37, "Further Stipulation to 13 Set Schedule for Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment," July 8, 2010). 14 15 3. As the Court is aware from prior filings, the parties participated in an 16 early neutral evaluation ("ENE") pursuant to the Court's ADR procedures on December 14, 17 2009. 18 19 4. While this matter was not resolved at the ENE session, the parties 20 conducted further significant and substantive settlement discussions after that session. 21 22 5. As part of those discussions, the parties agreed to jointly retain a board- 23 certified physician to conduct an in-person Independent Medical Examination ("IME") of 24 Plaintiff. 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE SCHEDULE FOR CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Case No. CV 09-2288 CRB 1 6. The parties further agreed that Aetna, the claims administrator for the 2 LTD plan, would review the IME report prepared by the physician, and conduct a re-review 3 of Plaintiff's appeal. 4 7. The parties further agreed that the outcome of Aetna's re-review would 5 determine whether the case will be dismissed or presented to the Court for further review. 6 7 8. The discussion and negotiation over the parameters of this agreement, 8 the discussion regarding which physician should conduct the examination, the scheduling 9 and completion of the IME and Aetna's now-pending review of the IME report, have 10 consumed considerable time. Currently, Aetna is performing its review, and the parties 11 anticipate receiving a decision from Aetna within the next couple of weeks. 12 13 9. Because the parties have devoted their energies to attempting to 14 resolve this matter without further assistance from the Court, and are currently awaiting the 15 results of those efforts, they do not wish to burden the Court and expend potentially 16 unnecessary resources in preparing the briefing as currently scheduled by the Court. 17 18 10. However, if the matter is not resolved pursuant to the parties' 19 settlement efforts, the parties wish to have sufficient time to resolve anticipated discovery 20 disputes and prepare their respective cross-motions for summary judgment, opposition, and 21 reply briefs; to extent such discovery and motions remain necessary. 22 23 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiff and 24 Defendant, by and through their respective undersigned attorneys of record, to continue the 25 date set for hearing on the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment, as well as all 26 associated deadlines, including the deadlines for the filing of the parties' opposition and 27 28 2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE SCHEDULE FOR CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Case No. CV 09-2288 CRB 1 reply briefs, and the date scheduled for the next Case Management Conference to be set by 2 the Court, as follows: 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 3 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE SCHEDULE FOR CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Case No. CV 09-2288 CRB Last day for parties to file and serve cross-motions for summary judgment: May 11, 2011 Last day for parties to file and serve opposition briefs: May 25, 2011 Last day for parties to file and serve reply briefs: June 1, 2011 Hearing on parties' cross-motions for summary judgment: June 17, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. Case Management Conference: 10:00 a.m. _______________________, 2011, at _______________ June 17, 2011 1 Good cause exists for this continuance of the existing deadline for filing the parties' 2 cross-motions for summary judgment, and all associated deadlines, as well as the next 3 Case Management Conference, as set forth above. 4 5 IT IS SO STIPULATED: 6 7 Dated: December 13, 2010 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Dated: December 13, 2010 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE SCHEDULE FOR CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Case No. CV 09-2288 CRB MILLER LAW GROUP A Professional Corporation By: /s/ Katherine L. Kettler Katherine L. Kettler Attorneys for Defendant INTEL CORPORATION LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN KANTOR & KANTOR, LLP By: /s/ Peter S. Sessions Glenn R. Kantor Peter S. Sessions Attorneys for Plaintiff ALICIA MACKEY 1 2 3 [PROPOSED] ORDER Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, and good cause shown, the scheduling of 4 the hearing on the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment, and all associated 5 deadlines, are set as follows: 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Dated: 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE SCHEDULE FOR CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Case No. CV 09-2288 CRB Last day for parties to file and serve cross-motions for summary judgment: May 11, 2011 Last day for parties to file and serve opposition briefs: May 25, 2011 Last day for parties to file and serve reply briefs: June 1, 2011 Hearing on parties' cross-motions for summary judgment: June 17, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. Case Management Conference: June 17, 2011 _______________________, 2011, at _______________ 10:00 a.m. IT IS SO ORDERED. December 14 , 2010 ER N F D IS T IC T O R A C LI FO har Judge C les R. B reyer R NIA The Honorable CharlesDERED OR R. Breyer I District United StatesS SO Court Judge IT UNIT ED S S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O NO RT H

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?