UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
July 5, 2012
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, A MASSACHUSETTS CORPORATION,
THE CALIFORNIA AUTOMOBILE ASSIGNED RISK PLAN, A PROGRAM ESTABLISHED UNDER CALIFORNIA INSURANCE
CODE SECTION 11620 ET SEQ., AND DOES 1 THROUGH 20, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.
THE CALIFORNIA AUTOMOBILE ASSIGNED RISK PLAN,
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, A MASSACHUSETTS CORPORATION, COUNTER-DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Hon. Maxine M. Chesney
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING THE CASE SCHEDULE
Dept: Courtroom 7, 19th Floor
Complaint filed: March 24, 2011 Trial date: February 4, 2013
Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2, 7-12 and 40-1, Defendant/Counter-Claimant The California Automobile Assigned Risk Plan ("CAARP") and Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Liberty 10 Mutual Insurance Company ("Liberty Mutual") respectfully submit this Stipulation And Proposed 11 Order To Extend The Schedule.
WHEREAS, Liberty Mutual filed its Complaint on March 24, 2011 (Docket No. 1); CAARP filed its answer and counterclaims on May 20, 2011 (Docket No. 11); and Liberty 14 Mutual filed its answer to CAARP's counterclaims on June 10, 2011 (Docket No. 13); 15
WHEREAS, on July 8, 2011, the Court, following a Case Management Conference, made 16 a Minute Entry (Docket No. 19), and on July 14, 2011, the Court entered a Pretrial Preparation 17 Order (Docket No. 22), which incorporated the deadlines set in the Court's Minute Entry; 18
WHEREAS, on February 21, 2012, pursuant to the Parties' stipulation, the Court entered 19 an Order Modifying The Case Schedule (Docket No. 43), which modified the dates in the Court's 20 Pretrial Preparation Order. 21
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2012, Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley entered an Order 22 re Discovery Disputes (Docket No. 53), which ordered the production of certain documents, the 23 scheduling of certain depositions and supplemented responses to certain discovery requests. 24
WHEREAS, counsel for CAARP and Liberty Mutual agree that additional
time is needed
25 to conduct and complete expert discovery beyond what is currently
allowed under the first Order 26
The Case Schedule, in part because of the additional fact
discovery that is currently 27 being taken pursuant to Judge Corley's
Order re Discovery Disputes; 28
2 continuance of the current trial date to address a scheduling
4 date as a reasonable scheduling accommodation, but CAARP will not
stipulate to -- and instead 5 opposes -- any request for a more
lengthy continuance of the current trial date if the Court does 6 not
grant a one-week continuance; 7
8 modifications to the first Order Modifying The Case Schedule,
subject to Court approval, that 9 would enable them to complete expert
discovery in this action and address a scheduling conflict 10 that
Liberty Mutual has with the current trial schedule; 11
WHEREAS, CAARP and Liberty Mutual agree the proposed modifications to the case 12 schedule regarding the deadlines applicable to expert discovery, dispositive motions and the case 13 management conference set forth below do not require a continuance of the trial date, and the 14 stipulated request for a one-week continuance of the trial date is premised exclusively on Liberty 15
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the undersigned as follows: 18
WHEREAS, Liberty Mutual has separately requested that CAARP stipulate to a one-week
WHEREAS, CAARP is willing to stipulate to a one-week continuance of the current trial
WHEREAS, counsel for CAARP and Liberty Mutual have conferred and agreed upon Mutual's scheduling conflict; 16
1. The dates set in the Pretrial Preparation Order are modified as set forth below:
a. JURY TRIAL DATE: February 11, 2013.
b. DESIGNATION OF EXPERTS:
Plaintiff/Defendant: No later than July 20, 2012. Plaintiff/Defendant: Rebuttal no later than August 10, 2012. (With objections by October 12, 2012.)
c. EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF: September 13, 2012.
d. DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS shall be filed no later than October 12, 2012.
e. FURTHER STATUS CONFERENCE STATEMENT DUE: October 19, 2012.
f. FURTHER STATUS CONFERENCE: October 26, 2012.
2. If the Court does not grant the requested one-week continuance of the trial date, CAARP and Liberty Mutual jointly: (a) request that the Court grant the remainder of this 3 stipulated and [Proposed] Order Modifying the Case Schedule, and (b) stipulate that, if Liberty 4
Mutual still desires a continuance of the trial date, Liberty Mutual shall be required to file a 5 motion in accordance with the local rules requesting such relief from the Court and CAARP shall 6 have an opportunity to oppose any such motion. 7
3. The dates previously set for the above events are hereby vacated. All other dates 8 set forth in the Court's first Order Modifying The Case Schedule entered on February 21, 2012 9 and the Pretrial Preparation Order entered on July 14, 2011 shall remain unchanged. 10
4. This stipulation and proposed order is without prejudice to either party seeking 11 further adjustment to the schedule. 12 13
Dated: July 2, 2012 FARELLA BRAUN & MARTEL LLP 14 By: /s/ Tyler C. Gerking Tyler C. Gerking Attorneys for Defendant THE CALIFORNIA AUTOMOBILE ASSIGNED RISK PLAN Dated: July 2, 2012 SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM, LLP By: /s/ James R. Carroll James R. Carroll Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION
IT IS SO ORDERED. ,with the exception that the trial date remains February 4, 2012 as scheduled, and as jointly requested by the parties in their prior stipulation. 25
Hon. Maxine M. Chesney United States District Judge
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.