Shared Systems Technnology, Inc. v. AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. et al

Filing 24

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 23 CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT. Case Management Conference previously set for 10/2/14 has been Rescheduled to 12/11/2014 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 9/8/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/8/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

SCHIFF HARDIN LLP
Eliot S. Jubelirer, CSB #61654
[e-mail]
Rocky N. Unruh, CSB #84049
[e-mail]
One Market
Spear Street Tower, Suite 3200
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
415-901-8701
BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP
E. Mabry Rogers (pro hac vice application to be
submitted)
[e-mail]
D. Bryan Thomas (pro hac vice application to be
submitted)
[e-mail]
One Federal Place
1819 Fifth Ave.
North Birmingham, AL 35203
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
205-521-8800
Attorneys for Use Plaintiff
SHARED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, INC.
(PULLMAN)

15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17
18
19
20

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA for
the use and benefit of SHARED
SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, INC.
(PULLMAN), a corporation,
Plaintiff,

21
22

v.

23

AMEC ENVIRONMENT &
INFRASTRUCTURE, INC., a
corporation; and ZURICH AMERICAN
INSURANCE COMPANY, a
corporation,

24
25
26

Case No. 3:14-CV-02871-RS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER CONTINUING CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND
EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO
COMPLAINT
Complaint Filed: June 20, 2014
Current CMC Date: October 2, 2014

Defendants.

27
28

Plaintiff, Shared Systems Technology, Inc. (Pullman) (“SST”), and defendant

S CHIFF H ARDIN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

1

AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. (“AMEC”) (collectively, the “Parties”), by and

2

through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate to (1) a 60-day continuance of the

3

Case Management Conference (“CMC”) (and all dates associated therewith), currently

4

set for October 2, 2014, and (2) an extension of Defendants’ time to respond to the

5

Complaint from September 29, 2014, to and including November 21, 2014.1 The Parties’

6

stipulation is based on the following facts:

7

1.

SST filed a Complaint to Recover on Payment Bond (Miller Act)

8

(“Complaint”) on June 20, 2014. The case was initially assigned to Magistrate Elizabeth

9

LaPorte.

10

2.

The action arises out of a federal construction project to stabilize and repair

11

exterior walls of the cellhouse on Alcatraz Island. SST was a sub-subcontractor on the

12

project; AMEC was the general contractor; and Zurich issued the Miller Act payment

13

bond.

14

3.

SST commenced this action in June to stop the running of the statute of

15

limitations. However, at the time the action was commenced, the parties planned to

16

participate in a multi-party mediation session before mediator, Randall Wulff of Wulff

17

Quinby Sochynsky. After the mediation session before Mr. Wulff, the Parties negotiated

18

basic terms for a settlement that, if finalized, will result in a dismissal of this action.

19

4.

The settlement negotiated by the Parties has taken and will continue to

20

take additional time to finalize and document because it involves a complex liquidation,

21

sharing and pass-through agreement. The settlement is complex because it involves the

22

Contract Disputes Act, the application of relevant FAR provisions, ongoing litigation

23

between AMEC and the subcontractor with which SST contracted, and this pending case

24

under the Miller Act. The Parties hope to be able to agree on all of the detailed terms

25
26
27
28
S CHIFF H ARDIN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

Defendant, Zurich American Insurance Company (“Zurich”), has been served with the
Complaint but has not yet entered an appearance given the ongoing settlement
negotiations, in an effort to minimize attorneys’ fees. SST has agreed to extend both
Defendants’ time to respond to the Complaint. It is defendant AMEC’s understanding
that Zurich will file the appropriate notice of appearance and Answer should the parties
fail to finalize the terms of the settlement agreement reached.
-21

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

1
2

and finalize a settlement agreement within the next 30 days.
5.

All defendants have been served with the Complaint, and there have been

3

three prior stipulations extending their time to respond. Defendants’ response is now

4

due on September 29, 2014.

5
6
7
8
9

6.

On July 29, 2014, SST filed a declination of assignment to Magistrate

LaPorte, and the case was thereafter assigned to this Court.
7.

On July 31, 2014, the Clerk issued a notice setting the initial CMC in this

Court for October 2, 2014.
8.

The Parties wish to avoid the time and expense of responding to the

10

Complaint, making initial Rule 26 disclosures, engaging in a Rule 26(f) conference, and

11

preparing for and attending the CMC, while they finalize and document the settlement

12

they have negotiated. This settlement, when finalized and documented, will result in a

13

dismissal of this case.

14

9.

The Parties, therefore, respectfully request that: (1) Defendants’ time to

15

respond to the Complaint be extended to and including November 21, 2014; (2) the CMC

16

be continued for 60 days, until early December, 2014 on a date convenient to the Court;

17

and (3) the dates for filing the Rule 26(f) report, completing initial disclosures, and filing

18

the Joint CMC statement be continued until one week before the new CMC date.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S CHIFF H ARDIN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

-3STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

1
2

Dated: September 8, 2014

Respectfully submitted,
SCHIFF HARDIN LLP

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

By:/s/ Rocky N. Unruh
Rocky N. Unruh (SBN 84049)
One Market Plaza, Spear Street Tower
32nd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415-901-8701
BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP
E. Mabry Rogers (pro hac vice application
to be submitted)
[e-mail]
D. Bryan Thomas (pro hac vice application
to be submitted)
[e-mail]
One Federal Place
1819 Fifth Ave.
North Birmingham, AL 35203
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 205-521-8800
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SHARED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, INC.
(PULLMAN)

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S CHIFF H ARDIN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

-4STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

1

Dated: September 8, 2014

2

KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON
LLP

3
4

By:/s/ Holly Gaudreau
Holly Gaudreau (SBN 209114)
[e-mail]
Eighth Floor, Two Embarcadero Center
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415-576-0300

5
6
7
8

Chad V. Theriot (pro hac vice application to
be submitted)
[e-mail]
Elizabeth H. Crabtree (pro hac vice
application to be submitted)
[e-mail]
11000 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 2800
Atlanta, GA 30309-4528
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 404-815-6555

9
10
11
12
13

Attorneys for Defendants
AMEC ENVIRONMENT &
INFRASTRUCTURE, INC.

14
15
16
17

ORDER

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S CHIFF H ARDIN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

Pursuant to the Parties’ stipulation and for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that:
1.

Defendants’ time to respond to the Complaint shall be extended to and

including November 21, 2014;
2.

The Case Management Conference shall be continued from October 2,

12/11/14
2014, until ___________ at 10:00 a.m.; and
3.

All other deadlines associated with the Case Management Conference,

including the filing of the Rule 26(f) report, completing initial disclosures, and filing the
Joint Case Management Conference statement, shall be continued until one week before
the new CMC date. The Parties shall comply with this Court’s Standing Order re: Initial
-5STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

1

Case Management and the Standing Order for All Judges of the Northern District of

2

California re: Contents of Joint Case Management Statements.

3
4

September 8
Dated: _________________, 2014

5
6

_____________________________
Richard Seeborg
United States District Judge

SF\321180627.2

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S CHIFF H ARDIN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

-6STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT