The American Insurance Company v. R&Q Reinsurance Company

Filing 43

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 42 STIPULATION WITH [PROPOSED] ORDER re 39 MOTION to Dismiss The American Insurance Company's Amended Complaint and Supporting Memorandum of Points and Authorities Stipulation to Continue the Briefing Schedule filed by The American Insurance Company. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on November 30, 2016. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/30/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 DENTONS US LLP KELLY D. FAIR (Bar No. 245408) kelly.fair@dentons.com SHAWN L. KELLY (Pro Hac Vice) shawn.kelly@dentons.com JOHN R. VALES (Pro Hac Vice) john.vales@dentons.com One Market Plaza, Spear Tower, 24th Floor San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 267-4000; Facsimile: (415) 267-4198 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff The American Insurance Company 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DENTONS US LLP ONE MARKET PLAZA , SPEAR TOWER, 24TH FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO , CALIFORNIA 94105 (415) 267-4000 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 The American Insurance Company, Plaintiff, 13 14 Case No. 3:16-cv-3044-JST STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON R&Q REINSURANCE COMPANY’S MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT v. 15 R&Q Reinsurance Company, 16 Defendant. Date: December 22, 2016 17 Time: 2pm 18 Courtroom: 9, 19th Floor 19 Judge: Hon. Jon S. Tigar 20 21 22 Pursuant to Local Rules 7-12 and 6-2, Plaintiff The American Insurance Company 23 (“TAIC”) and Defendant R&Q Reinsurance Company’s (“R&Q Re”) (collectively, the “Parties”) 24 hereby respectfully stipulate and jointly request that the Court continue the briefing schedule 25 related to R&Q Re’s Motion to Dismiss TAIC’s Amended Complaint as follows: 26 RECITALS 27 28 1. On October 12, 2016, the Court granted Defendant R&Q Re’s Motion to Dismiss 3:16-cv-3044-JST -1- STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING ON R&Q RE’S MOTION TO DISMISS 1 2 TAIC’s Complaint, with leave to amend. (Dkt. No. 35.) 2. On November 2, 2016, TAIC timely filed its Amended Complaint. (Dkt. No. 38.) 3. On November 15, 2016, R&Q Re timely filed a Motion to Dismiss TAIC’s 3 4 5 Amended Complaint which is scheduled to be heard on December 22, 2016. (Dkt. No. 39.) 6 TAIC’s deadline to oppose R&Q Re’s motion is November 29, 2016. 7 4. On November 18, 2016, the Parties’ counsel conducted a telephone conference with the Court’s appointed ADR officer, Sarah Winslow. On that call the Parties could not reach 9 DENTONS US LLP ONE MARKET PLAZA , SPEAR TOWER, 24TH FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO , CALIFORNIA 94105 (415) 267-4000 8 a consensus on terms to continue R&Q Re’s motion to dismiss or to enlarge TAIC’s time to file 10 its opposition brief. 11 5. On November 22, 2016, TAIC filed an administrative motion to continue R&Q 12 Re’s Motion to Dismiss and enlarge TAIC’s time to oppose R&Q Re’s motion by two-weeks to 13 account for the Thanksgiving Holiday and the unavailability of TAIC’s counsel and principals. 14 (Dkt. Nos. 40, 40-1, and 40-2.) 15 16 6. On November 28, 2016, R&Q Re filed a response to TAIC’s administrative 17 motion agreeing to continue the briefing schedule related to R&Q Re’s motion. In its response, 18 R&Q Re proposed to the Court that its motion to dismiss is suitable for disposition without oral 19 argument. (Dkt. Nos. 41, 41-1, and 41-2.) 20 21 7. The Parties disagree whether the Court should hear oral argument on R&Q Re’s motion to dismiss and acknowledge that this decision is within the Court’s discretion. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 8. Principals for R&Q Re and TAIC have recently engaged in settlement discussions, including an exchange of written settlement communications. A Settlement Conference is scheduled for January 3, 2017 before the Honorable U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Magistrate Judge Maria Valdez. 9. The only other enlargement of time requested in this case was the Parties’ stipulation to extend R&Q Re’s time to file a reply brief in support of its first Motion to Dismiss. 3:16-cv-3044-JST -2- STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING ON R&Q RE’S MOTION TO DISMISS 1 2 3 (Dkt. No. 24.) 10. Granting this stipulation should have no impact on the schedule of this case other than to suspend or delay motion practice while the Parties continue settlement negotiations. 4 5 11. Pursuant to the foregoing, the Parties hereby stipulate and agree to the following 6 continuation of the briefing schedule related to R&Q Re’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 39), and 7 request the Court’s approval of their stipulation to the proposed briefing schedule as follows: 8 DENTONS US LLP ONE MARKET PLAZA , SPEAR TOWER, 24TH FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO , CALIFORNIA 94105 (415) 267-4000 9 Event Previous Date Stipulated/Requested New Date Last Day to Oppose R&Q Re’s Motion to Dismiss 11/29/16 12/20/16 13 Last Day to File Reply Brief in support of Motion to Dismiss 12/6/16 1/10/17 14 Hearing on R&Q Re’s Motion to Dismiss 12/22/16 10 11 12 2/2/17 15 16 17 DENTONS US LLP Dated: November 29, 2016 18 By /s/ Kelly D. Fair Kelly D. Fair 19 20 Attorneys for Plaintiff The American Insurance Company 21 22 23 Dated: November 29, 2016 SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHNEY, LTD 24 By /s/ Timothy C. Connor Timothy C. Connor 25 26 Attorneys for R&Q Reinsurance Company 27 28 3:16-cv-3044-JST -3- STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING ON R&Q RE’S MOTION TO DISMISS 1 2 3 4 CERTIFICATION Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), the filing attorney attests that he has obtained concurrence regarding the filing of this document from the indicated signatories to the document. 5 6 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 Dated: November 30 2016 __________, Honorable Jon S. Tigar United States District Judge DENTONS US LLP ONE MARKET PLAZA , SPEAR TOWER, 24TH FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO , CALIFORNIA 94105 (415) 267-4000 9 10 11 12 101977504\V-1 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3:16-cv-3044-JST -4- STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING ON R&Q RE’S MOTION TO DISMISS

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?