Chartis Specialty Insurance Company et al v. United States of America

Filing 40

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 38 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re 27 ECF Transfer In - converted docket entry, JOINT STIPULATION RE PLAINTIFFS' AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS filed by Whittaker Corporation. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 4/18/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/18/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 WOOD, SMITH, HENNING & BERMAN LLP DAVID F. WOOD #68063 10960 Wilshire Boulevard, 18th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90024 Telephone; (310) 481-7601 Facsimile: (310) 481-7650 GARDERE WYNNE SEWELL LLP SCOTT L. DAVIS TX #05547030 (pending pro hac vice application) MATTHEW J. SCHROEDER TX # 00791619 (pending pro hac vice application) COLIN G. MARTIN TX # 24013105 (pending pro hac vice application) 1601 Elm Street, Suite 3000 Dallas, TX 75201 Telephone: (214) 999-3000 Facsimile: (214) 999-4667 Attorneys for Plaintiff Chartis Specialty Insurance Company 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 16 17 18 19 20 CHARTIS SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois corporation, for itself and as subrogee of Whittaker Corporation; and WHITTAKER CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiffs, 21 22 vs. 23 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 24 Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. CV 13-01527 EMC [PROPOSED] ORDER RE JOINT STIPULATION RE PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 25 26 27 28 601918215v1 -1- [PROPOSED] ORDER RE JOINT STIPULATION Case No. CV 13-01527 EMC 1 The Court has considered the Parties’ JOINT STIPULATION RE 2 PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DEFENDANT’S 3 MOTION TO DISMISS and, finding good cause, hereby enters the following 4 Order pursuant to Local Rule 7-12: 5 A. Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint 6 a. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), Plaintiffs 7 shall file an Amended Complaint to clarify Chartis Specialty 8 Insurance Company’s (“Chartis”) direct claim under CERCLA 9 section 107 and to add, in the alternative, a claim under CERCLA 10 section 112. Whittaker Corporation (“Whittaker”) shall not 11 amend its claims in the Amended Complaint, except that Chartis 12 and Whittaker shall not include the CERCLA section 113 claims 13 that were previously dismissed without prejudice. The United 14 States’ consent to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint shall not be 15 construed as an admission that the United States agrees that any 16 of Plaintiffs’ claims or proposed claims are legally valid, and 17 shall not prejudice the United States’ rights to oppose such claims 18 in future proceedings. 19 b. Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint shall be filed within five (5) days 20 of the entry of this Order. c. The United States shall answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ 22 Amended Complaint within fourteen (14) days of the filing of the S DISTRICT Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint. TE C TA IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 DATED: April _, 2013 ______________________________ DERED SO OR I Edward M. Chen HonorableT IS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE RT 28 -2- ER H 601918215v1 R NIA n M. Che FO dward Judge E NO 27 LI 26 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE JOINT STIPULATION Case No. CV 13-01527 EMC A 25 S 24 UNIT ED 23 RT U O 21 N D IS T IC T R OF C

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?