Doe v. Life Insurance Company of North America et al

Filing 85

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 76 Plaintiff's Administrative Motion to Reopen Case. Signed by Judge Laurel Beeler on 09/28/2011. (lblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/28/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 Northern District of California 10 Oakland Division JOHN DOE, 12 For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. C 09-01665 LB v. ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO REOPEN CASE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, ET AL., 15 16 17 Defendants. _____________________________________/ In this ERISA action, Plaintiff John Doe, a former employee of Excite, Inc., previously moved 18 for summary judgment that he is covered under Excite’s life insurance policy (administered by Life 19 Insurance Company of North America (“LINA”)) and that he does not have to pay insurance 20 premiums because he is disabled under the plan. ECF No. 51. The court granted in part and denied 21 in part his motion and remanded the matter to LINA to determine whether Plaintiff is “disabled” 22 under the life insurance policy. ECF No. 64. 23 24 In its subsequent order remanding the matter and administratively closing the case, the court stated: 25 26 While Plaintiff pursues his claim with LINA, this case may be reopened by appropriate motion if necessary. 27 28 Any motion for attorney’s fees and costs is due no later than 14 days after either party declares the conclusion of the meet and confer process following any final determination of Plaintiff’s life waiver benefits. C 09-01665 1 2 ECF No. 75. Recently, Plaintiff moved to reopen the case and for summary judgment. ECF No. 76, 77. 3 Plaintiff subsequently withdrew his motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 83), but he still 4 maintains that the case should be reopened so he can move for attorney’s fees and costs. 5 Plaintiff’s motion to reopen the case is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. As the court (including attorney’s fees and costs) before moving to reopen the case or for attorney’s fees and 8 costs. Should the meet and confer process fail to resolve the outstanding issues, either party may 9 move to reopen the case at that time. 10 This disposes of ECF No. 76. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 For the Northern District of California previously explained, the parties are expected to meet and confer about any outstanding issues 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 Dated: September 28, 2011 _______________________________ LAUREL BEELER United States Magistrate Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 C 09-01665 2

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?