Mullins v. Prudential Insurance Company of America et al

Filing 162

ORDER by Judge Charles R. Simpson, III on 7/17/2012; 157 MOTION to Refer to Mediation GRANTED; matter referred to USMJ for mediation; 156 MOTION for scheduling order held in abeyance while matter is in mediation.cc:counsel, USMJ (TLB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT LOUISVILLE

JOHN A. MULLINS

PLAINTIFF

v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:09-cv-371-S

PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE CO.
of AMERICA

DEFENDANT

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on motions of the plaintiff, John A. Mullins (“Plaintiff”), for
a scheduling order to address further proceedings (DN 156) and for referral of this matter for
mediation (DN 157). The defendant, Prudential Insurance Co. of America (“Defendant”) has filed
responses to each motion (DNs 158, 159) and Plaintiff has replied (DNs 160, 161), making the
matter now ripe for adjudication.
This case involves claims by Plaintiff under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act
of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq. We previously held that Defendant’s denial of
Plaintiff’s benefits claim was arbitrary and capricious. (DNs 125, 126). We remanded Plaintiff’s
claims to Defendant for a full-and-fair review. Id. Defendant denied Plaintiff’s claims on remand.
See (DN 156). Plaintiff now moves this court to reopen the matter and enter a scheduling order so
that Plaintiff may now challenge Defendant’s decision to deny his claims on remand. Id.
Plaintiff filed a second motion on the same day to refer this matter to mediation. (DN 157).
Defendant did not object to the motion for referral to mediation, but only raised logistical issues.

(DN 159). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the motion to refer to
mediation (DN 157) is GRANTED.
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is REFERRED TO THE
MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR MEDIATION. All issues regarding who must be present at the
mediation will be determined by the Magistrate Judge. However, the parties should be aware that
the magistrates typically do not allow participation in mediation by telephone.
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that because this matter is referred for mediation
in front of the Magistrate Judge, the motion for a scheduling order to address further proceedings
(DN 156) is HELD IN ABEYANCE while this matter is in mediation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

July 17, 2012

cc:

Counsel of Record
MJ Whalin's Case Manager

-2-