DGP Associates, LP v. American Guarantee & Liability Insurance Company et al
Filing
20
ORDER re 19 Opposition/Response to Motion, filed by American Guarantee & Liability Insurance Company. Zurich Defendant's sur-reply due 3/7/13. Motion hearing reset to 3/14/13 at 1:30 p.m.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 2/28/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/28/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
BISHOP | BARRY | DRATH
2000 POWELL STREET SUITE 1425
EMERYVILLE, C ALIFORN IA 94608
T ELEPHONE: (510) 596-0888 F ACSIMILE: (510) 596-0899
9
Jonathan Gross, State Bar No. 122010
jgross@bishop-barry.com
Victor Jacobellis, State Bar No. 278988
vjacobellis@bishop-barry.com
BISHOP | BARRY | DRATH
2000 Powell Street, Suite 1425
Emeryville, California 94608
Telephone: (510) 596-0888
Facsimile: (510) 596-0899
Attorneys for Defendants
AMERICAN GUARANTEE AND
LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY; AMERICAN
ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY; ZURICH
AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY; and
ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
OF ILLINOIS
10
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
13
DGP ASSOCIATES, LP,
14
Plaintiff,
15
v.
16
AMERICAN GUARANTEE AND
LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY, et
al.,
17
18
Defendants.
Case No. 3:12-cv-06348 EMC
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANTS’ OBJECTIONS TO REPLY
TO DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO
MOTION TO REMAND
Date: March 7, 2013
Time: 1:30 p.m.
Courtroom: 5
Judge: Hon. Edward M. Chen
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
///
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND
CASE NO. 3:12-CV-06348 EMC
1
2
ORDER
The Court having considered all pleadings and papers submitted by the parties regarding
3
the Zurich Defendants’ Objection to and Request to Strike New Evidence and Argument in
4
Plaintiff’s Reply To Defendant’s Opposition to Motion to Remand or, in the Alternative, Request
5
for Leave to File Sur-Reply, including Declarations and Exhibits, the materials on file with the
6
Court, and finding that Plaintiff has presented new evidence and arguments in its Reply to
7
Defendants’ Opposition to Motion to Remand,
8
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
(a)
The Zurich Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED;
10
(b)
The Declaration of John Piccetti in Support of Plaintiff’s Reply to
Defendants’ Opposition to Motion to Remand is stricken; and
(c)
The Declaration of Josephine Lo, and all attached exhibits, in Support of
Plaintiff’s Reply to Defendants’ Opposition to Motion to Remand is
stricken;
11
13
(b)
The Zurich Defendants are granted leave to file a sur-reply to respond to the
new evidence and arguments raised in Plaintiff’s Reply to Defendants’
Opposition to Motion to Remand; and
March 7
The Zurich Defendants’ sur-reply is to be filed by _______________, 2013.
(c)
The motion hearing is reset from March 7, 2013 to March 14, 2013 at 1:30 p.m.
17
18
19
20
22
23
27
28
AS
hen
rd M. C
dwa
Judge E
ER
H
26
RT
25
By: ______________________________
Honorable Edward M. Chen
D
RDERE
S SO States District Court Judge
IUnited O FIED
IT Northern District of California
MODI
NO
24
2/28
Dated: __________, 2013
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
RT
U
O
21
IT SO ORDERED,
R NIA
16
FO
(a)
LI
15
or in the alternative,
A
14
S
12
UNIT
ED
BISHOP | BARRY | DRATH
2000 POWELL STREET SUITE 1425
EMERYVILLE, C ALIFORN IA 94608
T ELEPHONE: (510) 596-0888 F ACSIMILE: (510) 596-0899
9
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
2
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND
CASE NO. 3:12-cv-06348-EMC
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?