Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Andrew J. Nalbandian, Jr., An Individual and Gregory M. Nalbandian, An Individual v. Lockheed Martin Corporation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


July 6, 2011

ANDREW J. NALBANDIAN, JR., AN INDIVIDUAL AND GREGORY M. NALBANDIAN, AN INDIVIDUAL,
PLAINTIFFS,
v.
LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION, A MARYLAND CORPORATION, AS ADMINISTRATOR AND FIDUCIARY OF THE LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION SALARIED EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT PROGRAM;
LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION SALARIED EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT
PROGRAM, AN EMPLOYEE PENSION PLAN WITHIN THE MEANING OF 29 U.S.C. §§ 1002(2)(A) AND 1002(35); AND DOES 1 THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lucy H. Koh United States District Judge

ORDER SEEKING DEFENDANTS' POSITIONS ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME AND PLANTIFFS' MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

(re: dkt. #61 and #65)

According to the current schedule in this case, the last day to file dispositive motions is July 21, 2011; the hearing on dispositive motions is August 25, 2011; the pretrial conference is October 19, 2011; and the two-day bench trial is November 14-15, 2011. See May 18, 2011 Case Management Order [dkt. #60]. On July 5, 2011, Plaintiffs filed: (1) a motion for leave to file a 27 motion for reconsideration of the Court's February 1, 2011 Order Granting Defendants' Motion to 28

Dismiss Claims Two and Four of the First Amended Complaint with Prejudice [dkt. #49]; and (2) a motion to enlarge time with respect to the last day to file dispositive motions and dispositive 2 motion hearing so that Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration (assuming leave is granted) may be 3 heard and decided prior to those dispositive motion deadlines. According to Plaintiffs, they just 4 learned of a May 16, 2011 decision by the Supreme Court, CIGNA Corp. v. Amara, 131 S. Ct. 5 1866 (2011), which "materially changes the law" with respect to the claims at issue in this action.

See Civ. L.R. 7-9(b)(2) (requiring a party seeking leave to file a motion for reconsideration to 7 specifically show "the emergence of new material facts or a change of law occurring after the time" 8 of the order for which reconsideration is sought).

The Court finds that Plaintiffs' motions, especially in light of the looming July 21, 2011 10 dispositive motion filing deadline and the August 25, 2011 dispositive motion hearing deadline, by Monday, July 11, 2011, Defendants shall file a merit a response from Defendants. Accordingly, 12 response to Plaintiffs' motions. Defendants' response shall not exceed ten (10) pages.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20110706

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.