O'Connor v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

Filing 22

SCHEDULING AND PRETRIAL ORDER, Case referred to Private ADR; last day to conduct Mediation by 9/5/2025. Defendant to Provide Plaintiff Copy of Administrative Record due by 6/6/2025. Objections to Contents therein due by 7/11/2025. Filing of Plain tiff Opening Rule 52 Brief due by 9/5/2025. Filing of Defendant Opening/Responding Rule 52 Brief due by 9/26/2025. Filing of Plaintiff Responding Brief due by 10/10/2025. Filing of Defendant Reply due by 10/24/2025. In-Person Hearing set for 11/18/20 25, at 02:00 PM in Oakland, Courtroom 1, 4th Floor before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. Compliance Deadline set for 4/18/2025, at 09:01 AM in Oakland, Chambers. All compliance deadlines are decided on the papers and personal appearances are not n ecessary. If compliance is complete, the compliance deadline will be vacated. Failure to timely comply with the compliance deadline may result in sanctions or an additional conference being set. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 3/5/2025. (eac, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/5/2025)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 2 3 4 CHERYL O’CONNOR, 5 Plaintiff, 6 7 Case No.: 4:24-cv-08723-YGR SCHEDULING AND PRETRIAL ORDER vs. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, 8 Defendant. 9 The Court has read and reviewed the parties’ Joint Case Management Conference Statement. 10 (Dkt. No. 21). Given that this case arises under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 11 Northern District of California United States District Court 12 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001, et seq., the Court will not set a date for a bench trial until briefing under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52 is completed.1 If required, a bench trial can be 13 scheduled on a fairly expedited basis. In light of the instant order, the Court hereby VACATES the 14 case management conference currently set for Monday, March 10, 2025. Another conference can be 15 scheduled if required by contacting the Court’s courtroom deputy. See Standing Order in Civil Cases 16 ¶ 12. 17 The Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows: 18 Defendant shall preserve the administrative record. The parties shall meet and confer on the 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 scope of the administrative record and agree upon deadlines for resolution of this issue. The administrative record shall be delivered to the Court thirty (30) days prior to the filing of the first merits brief as set forth herein: First, a physical copy of the administrative record (Bates-stamped and double-sided pages) shall be delivered in three-ring binders. The administrative record shall include an index and be segregated in appropriate, labeled categories (i.e. medical records, internal review records, third party expert reports, etc.) 26 27 28 1 Should the parties determine that a bench trial will be required, rather than (or in conjunction with) resolution on the papers, the Court will contact the parties and modify the schedule if necessary. 1 Second, an electronic copy of the administrative record shall be filed under seal pursuant to 2 this Order. To the extent it is filed in parts, those parts shall be labeled and indexed to allow 3 for easy access to the documents. The index shall be separately filed. In addition, the parties 4 shall deliver the electronic form of the administrative record on an external USB memory 5 device along with the physical copy. The electronic copy shall allow for searching. 6 PRETRIAL SCHEDULE 7 8 LAST DAY TO AMEND PLEADINGS/ADD PARTIES N/A. Parties may not amend pleadings or add parties. 9 DEFENDANT TO PROVIDE PLAINTIFF COPY OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD June 6, 2025 OBJECTIONS TO CONTENTS THEREIN July 11, 2025 13 LAST DAY TO CONDUCT MEDIATION September 5, 2025 14 FILING OF PLAINTIFF OPENING RULE 52 BRIEF September 5, 2025 15 September 26, 2025 16 FILING OF DEFENDANT OPENING/RESPONDING RULE 52 BRIEF 17 FILING OF PLAINTIFF RESPONDING BRIEF October 10, 2025 18 FILING OF DEFENDANT REPLY BRIEF October 24, 2025 19 IN-PERSON HEARING November 18, 2025 at 2:00 p.m. Courtroom One, United States Courthouse Oakland, California 10 11 Northern District of California United States District Court 12 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 With respect to Rule 52 briefing, each party shall meet and confer on the appropriate standard of review and confirm the same within the briefing. Any disagreement with respect to this issue shall be raised with the Court no later than thirty (30) days prior to the filing of the opening brief by way of the Court’s procedure on summary judgment practice. See Standing Order in Civil Cases ¶ 9. The parties are REFERRED to private mediation to be completed by September 5, 2025. The parties shall provide the Court with the name of an agreed-upon mediator by April 11, 2025 by filing a JOINT Notice. A compliance hearing regarding shall be held on Friday, April 18, 2025 on the Court's 9:01a.m. calendar, in the Federal Courthouse, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California, in 2 1 Courtroom 1. By April 11, 2025, the parties shall file either the JOINT Notice or a one-page JOINT 2 STATEMENT setting forth an explanation for their failure to comply. If compliance is complete, 3 the parties need not appear and the compliance hearing will be taken off calendar. Virtual 4 appearances will be allowed if the parties have submitted a joint statement in a timely fashion. 5 The parties must comply with both the Court’s Standing Order in Civil Cases and Standing 6 Order for Pretrial Instructions in Civil Cases for additional deadlines and procedures. All Standing 7 Orders are available on the Court’s website at http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/ygrorders. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 5, 2025 _______________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 10 11 Northern District of California United States District Court 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?