Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company v. Urata & Sons Cement, Inc. et al
Filing
29
SECOND STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE AND RESCHEDULING CASE MANAGMENT CONFERENCE re 28 Stipulation filed by Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company. Joint Case Management Statement due by 2/16/2012. Initial Case Management Conference set for 2/23/2012 02:00 PM in Courtroom 3, 3rd Floor, Oakland. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 12/6/11. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/6/2011)
1
2
3
4
Donald E. Dorfman (SBN 63725)
Andrew R. Neilson (SBN 221694)
NIXON PEABODY LLP
One Embarcadero Center, 18th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 984-8200
Facsimile: (415) 984-8300
5
6
Attorneys for Plaintiff
WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
OAKLAND DIVISION
11
12
13
14
CASE NO. C 11-02438 PJH
WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES
INSURANCE COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
15
16
17
18
19
SECOND STIPULATION AND PROPOSED
ORDER CONTINUING RESPONSIVE
PLEADING DEADLINE AND
RESCHEDULING CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE
vs.
URATA & SONS CEMENT, INC. and
BOSA DEVELOPMENT CALIFORNIA II,
INC.
Defendants.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION
This is an insurance coverage dispute. Plaintiff Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance
Company (“Westchester”) seeks a judicial declaration regarding its duties and obligations arising
from an underlying action known as Liburd v. Bosa Development, Inc. et al., San Francisco Superior
Court, Case No. CGC-09-491615 (the “Underlying Action”). Westchester, together with Defendant
Urata & Sons Cement, Inc. (“Urata.” Collectively, the “Parties”) are engaged in negotiations aimed at
pragmatic resolution of the coverage issues herein.
1
SECOND STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
C 11-02438 PJH
13702217.1
1
2
The Parties believe that it would promote efficiency and conservation of the Court’s and the
Parties’ resources to continue pretrial deadlines while the Parties continue to negotiate.
3
THEREFORE, the Parties, through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree:
4
1.
5
2.
6
7
Urata’s responsive pleading deadline shall be continued to January 16, 2012.
The Case Management Conference currently scheduled for January 5, 2012, shall be
23
continued to February 24, 2012 .
SO STIPULATED.
8
9
Dated: December 1, 2011
NIXON PEABODY LLP
10
11
By
12
/s/ Andrew Neilson
Attorneys for Plaintiff
WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES
INSURANCE COMPANY
13
14
15
16
Dated: December 1, 2011
ERICKSEN ARBUTHNOT LLP
17
By
18
/s/ Andrew Sclar
Attorneys for Defendant
URATA & SONS CEMENT, INC.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2SECOND STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
C 11-02438 PJH
13702217.1
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER
2
For good cause appearing:
3
1.
4
16, 2012.
5
2.
Defendant Urata & Sons, Inc.’s responsive pleading deadline is continued to January
6
The Case Management Conference currently scheduled for January 5, 2012, is
23
continued to February 24, 2012 at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 3, 3rd Floor, Federal Building, 1301 Clay
7
Street, Oakland, California. The parties shall meet and confer as required by FRCP 26(f) with respect
8
to those subjects set forth in FRCP 16(c). Not less than seven days before the conference, counsel
9
shall file a joint case management statement addressing each of the items listed in the “Standing
10
Order For All Judges of the Northern District – Contents of Joint Case Management statement.” Any
11
request to reschedule the date of the conference shall be made in writing, and by stipulation if
12
possible, at least ten days before the date of the conference and must be based on good cause.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
UNIT
ED
6
Dated: December ___, 2011
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
RT
U
O
RED
17
yllis J.
udge Ph
NO
18
RT
19
J
ER
21
n
Hamilto
A
H
20
R NIA
ORDE
______________________________
T IS SO
I
Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton
16
FO
15
S
14
LI
13
N
D IS T IC T
R
OF
C
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
SECOND STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
C 11-02438 PJH
13702217.1
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?