Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Dooley v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.

United States District Court, E.D. California

July 24, 2019

DIANE DOOLEY, Plaintiff,
v.
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and DOES 1 to 100, Defendants.

          STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER

          WILLIAM B. SHUBB UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         After reviewing the parties' Joint Status Report, the court hereby vacates the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference scheduled for August 5, 2019, and makes the following findings and orders without needing to consult with the parties any further.

         I. SERVICE OF PROCESS

         All defendants have been served, and no further service is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b).

         II. JOINDER OF PARTIES/AMENDMENTS

         No further joinder of parties or amendments to pleadings will be permitted except with leave of court, good cause having been shown under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b). See Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604 (9th Cir. 1992).

         III. JURISDICTION/VENUE

         Jurisdiction is predicated upon federal question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1331, because plaintiff's claims are covered by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C § 1132 et seq. Venue is undisputed and hereby found to be proper.

         IV. DISCOVERY

         The court understands that this is an ERISA case where discovery is generally limited to the material contained in the administrative record. Nevertheless, because the parties disagree as to whether there should be discovery beyond the production of the administrative record, the court includes all the deadlines it typically does.

         The parties shall serve initial disclosures required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1) on or before September 4, 2019.

         The parties shall disclose experts and produce reports in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) by no later than October 11, 2019. With regard to expert testimony intended solely for rebuttal, those experts shall be disclosed and reports produced in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) on or before November 8, 2019.

         The parties have not suggested why they need a substantial amount of time for discovery. Accordingly, all discovery, including depositions for preservation of testimony, is left open, save and except that it shall be so conducted as to be completed by December 13, 2019. The word “completed” means that all discovery shall have been conducted so that all depositions have been taken and any disputes relevant to discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate order if necessary and, where discovery has been ordered, the order has been obeyed. All motions to compel discovery must be noticed on the magistrate ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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