National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, PA et al v. Seagate Technology, Inc.

Filing 324

STIPULATION AND ORDER Granting Certification For Entry of Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) re 323 Stipulation. Signed by Judge James Ware on 9/2/2010. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/2/2010)

Download PDF
National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, PA et al v. Seagate Technology, Inc. Doc. 324 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (Counsel listed on next page) UNIT ED S S DISTRICT TE C TA UNIT ED S S DISTRICT TE C TA es Ware Ware udge Jam es ge Jam J ud J ER N F D IS T IC T O R ER N A C LI FO Judge James Ware R NIA IT IS SO ORDERED F D I ST I C T O R UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA; AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY AND AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL SPECIALTY LINES INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiffs , v. SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY, INC., Defendant. SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY LLC., Counterclaimant, v. NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA; AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY AND AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL SPECIALTY LINES INSURANCE COMPANY, Counterclaim Defendants. STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING CERTIFICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT CASE NO: C 04-01593 JW STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING CERTIFICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 54(b) The Honorable James Ware CASE NO. C 04-01593 JW A LI FO RN ERED SO ORD ED IT IS DIFI AS MO RT U O NO C Dockets.Justia.com IA T RT UR U O O RT H H H RT NO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION WHEREAS, plaintiffs National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa. ("National Union"), American International Underwriters Insurance Company ("AIU"), and American International Specialty Lines Insurance Company, currently known as Chartis Specialty Insurance Company ("AISLIC") (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), filed Declaratory Judgment claims against defendant Seagate Technology LLC ("Seagate") seeking a declaration that they owed no duty to defend or indemnify Seagate in Convolve, Inc., et al. v. Seagate Technology LLC, et al, Case No. 00 Civ. 5141 (S.D.N.Y.) (the "Convolve Action") (Docket Item No. 1); and WHEREAS, Seagate filed Counterclaims for Relief against Plaintiffs for Breach of Contract, Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, and Declaratory Judgment that Plaintiffs are obligated to defend Seagate in the Convolve Action (Docket Item No. 12); and WHEREAS, the Court has resolved on summary judgment and there remain no outstanding issues as to Plaintiffs' Declaratory Judgment claims as to their duty to defend Seagate in the Convolve Action, Seagate's First Counterclaim for Relief for Breach of Contract as to AISLIC, Seagate's Second Counterclaim for Relief for Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing as to all Plaintiffs, and Third Counterclaim for Relief for Declaratory Relief as to all Plaintiffs; and WHEREAS, the Court has dismissed as unripe Plaintiffs' Declaratory Judgment claims as to their duty to indemnify Seagate in the Convolve Action; and WHEREAS, Seagate and National Union and AIU have agreed to stay Seagate's First Counterclaim for Relief for Breach of Contract as to those plaintiffs pending arbitration as to the amounts owed by National Union and AIU pursuant to their adjudicated duty to defend Seagate in the Convolve Action; and WHEREAS, the Parties agree that there is no just reason for delay of entry of judgment as to those claims that have been finally adjudicated because (1) there is no risk that multiple appeals will present the same issues given the nature of the claims on which the parties seek Rule 54(b) final judgment and the nature of Seagate's First Counterclaim for Relief for Breach of Contract against National Union and AIU; (2) the claims on which the parties seek Rule 54(b) STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING CERTIFICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT CASE NO. C 04-01593 JW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 final judgment do not present questions that remain to be adjudicated in connection with Seagate's First Counterclaim for Relief for Breach of Contract against National Union and AIU; (3) the need for review on the claims for which the parties seek Rule 54(b) final judgment will not be mooted by future proceedings in connection with Seagate's First Counterclaim for Relief for Breach of Contract against National Union and AIU; and (4) Seagate, National Union and AIU have agreed to stay Seagate's First Counterclaim for Relief for Breach of Contract as to those plaintiffs pending arbitration. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-12, it is hereby STIPULATED AND AGREED by and among the parties as follows: 1. Seagate's First Counterclaim for Relief for Breach of Contract against National Union and AIU may be stayed pending arbitration as described above and, in the event the Court grants this Stipulation, Seagate' First Counterclaim shall be stayed. 2. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b), Judgment may be entered on Plaintiffs' Claims for Declaratory Judgment, Seagate's First Counterclaim for Relief as to AISLIC, and Seagate's Second and Third Counterclaims for Relief as to all Plaintiffs, in accord with the Court's prior Orders and/or rulings arising out of or related in any way to such Claims and/or Counterclaims, including, without limitation, the following rulings: a. Plaintiffs owed a duty to defend Seagate in the Convolve Action from November 1, 2000 to July 18, 2007. b. AISLIC breached its duty to defend Seagate in the Convolve Action and is ordered to pay Seagate damages in the amount of $3,128,026.46 in connection with Seagate's First Counterclaim for Relief against AISLIC. The amount of the judgment herein represents the prejudgment interest due from AISLIC to Seagate. c. Seagate's Second Counterclaim for Relief for Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing is dismissed as to all Plaintiffs. d. Plaintiffs' claim for Declaratory Judgment as to their duty to indemnify Seagate in the Convolve Action is dismissed as unripe. STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING CERTIFICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT -2- CASE NO. C 04-01593 JW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. This stipulation shall not alter, eliminate or otherwise affect any party's right to appeal any part of the Judgment entered pursuant hereto and/or any of the Court's prior Orders and/or rulings arising out of or related in any way to the Claims and/or Counterclaims as to which Judgment is entered. All appellate rights are specifically preserved. 4. In conjunction with this Stipulation, the parties herewith submit two alternative forms of Judgment one proposed by Plaintiffs (Ex. A) and one proposed by Seagate (Ex. B) Dated: September 2, 2010 _______________________________ JAMES WARE and respectfully request that the Court direct entry of that form it deems appropriate. The United States District Judge alternative forms of Judgment are identical in all respects, with the single exception that the form proposed by Plaintiffs (Ex. A) adds a final paragraph that reads: The parties' consent to the form and entry of the within Judgment shall not alter, eliminate or otherwise affect any party's right to appeal any part of this Judgment and/or any of the Court's prior Orders and/or rulings arising out of or related in any way to the Claims and/or Counterclaims as to which Judgment is entered. All appellate rights are specifically preserved. Seagate submits that this final paragraph is improper because it does not dispose of any claims or counterclaims and is unnecessary because the parties' appellate rights are fully preserved by virtue of Paragraph 3 above. Plaintiffs submit that the inclusion of this paragraph is warranted in the context of the entry of Rule 54(b) Judgment pursuant to the consent of the parties. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING CERTIFICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT -3- CASE NO. C 04-01593 JW

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?