Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-00980/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-00980-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 368
Nature of Suit: Asbestos Personal Injury - Prod.liab.
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation

---

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

K:\Injured\106929\FED\Stip stay or cont (Hanna).wpd 1

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT

DEADLINES - C08-980-JSW

BRAYTON

 ̃PURCELL LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

222 RUSH LANDING ROAD

P O BOX 6169

NOVATO, CALIFORNIA 94948-6169

(415) 898-1555

ALAN R. BRAYTON, ESQ., S.B. #73685

DAVID R. DONADIO, ESQ., S.B. #154436

BRAYTON ̃PURCELL LLP 

Attorneys at Law

222 Rush Landing Road

P.O. Box 6169

Novato, California 94948-6169

(415) 898-1555

(415) 898-1247 (Fax No.)

Attorneys for Plaintiff

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

 RUDOLPH HANNA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY,

TODD SHIPYARDS CORPORATION,

NATIONAL STEEL AND

SHIPBUILDING COMPANY,

Defendants. 

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

No. C08-980-JSW

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO

STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE

ALTERNATIVE, TO CONTINUE CASE

MANAGEMENT DEADLINE AND

CONFERENCE, AND TO EXTEND TIME;

[PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY;

[PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE] ORDER

TO CONTINUE

Pursuant to Civil L. R. 7-11 and 7-12, the following parties hereby stipulate to, and

respectfully move the Court for, an Order extending time as set forth in the Case Management

Scheduling Order filed February 15, 2008 (Document 3) , and the Order Setting Case

Management Conference and Requiring Joint Case Management Conference Statement, filed

March 19, 2008 (Document 10) for the following good cause:

On March 25, 2008, Defendant GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY filed Document 17,

a Notice to Tag Along Action regarding the pending Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL”) in the

Eastern District of Pennsylvania, seeking among other things, to move Jurisdiction of this matter

to that District. Defendant GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY has faxed counsel copy of a

cover letter showing that this notice was mailed to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

Case 3:08-cv-00980-CRB Document 20 Filed 04/04/08 Page 1 of 4
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

K:\Injured\106929\FED\Stip stay or cont (Hanna).wpd 2

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT

DEADLINES - C08-980-JSW

(“JPML”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, said notice to the JPML from counsel being necessary

to initiate the transfer process.

On July 29, 1991, the JPML entered an order transferring all asbestos personal injury

cases pending in the federal courts to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of

Pennsylvania, for coordinated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. (In re Asbestos

Products Liability Litigation (no. VI). MDL No. 875., 771 F.Supp. 415 (1991)). That order also

applies to “tag-along actions,” or actions involving common questions of fact filed after January

17, 1991. Such actions are to be transferred to the eastern District of Pennsylvania as part of

MDL 875, for coordinated pretrial proceedings. 

The JPML has held that a district court has the authority to stay pending a transfer order.

In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1348, 1349 n.1 (J.P.M.L. 2001)

(“[T]hose courts concluding that such issues should be addressed by the transferee judge need

not rule on them, and the process of 1407 transfer in MDL-875 can continue without any

unnecessary interruption or delay.”)

The parties agree that it is likely that the JPML will transfer this matter to the Eastern

District of Pennsylvania.

However, to date, the Clerk of the JPML has not entered a Conditional Transfer Order

pursuant to JPML Rule 12(a) or filed an order to show cause why the action should not be

transferred, pursuant to JPML Rule 13(b). 

It is likely the dates set forth in the Case Management Scheduling Order including the

deadlines imposed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26, will come to pass before the Clerk of

the JPML acts. 

The parties make this Motion on the grounds that a stay of this action would (a) promote

judicial efficiency, (b) allow consistency in pretrial rulings, and (c) be most convenient to the

parties. 

Due to the pending action by the Clerk of the JPML, the parties hereby STIPULATE to

and respectfully request the Court VACATE its Case Management Scheduling Order and that

the Court issue an Order STAYING this action pending the outcome of the MDL Panel’s

Case 3:08-cv-00980-CRB Document 20 Filed 04/04/08 Page 2 of 4
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

1

Case Management Scheduling Order filed February 15, 2008 (Document 3) provides

that "[i]f the Initial Case Management Conference is continued, the other deadlines are

continued accordingly." Therefore these dates are calculated pursuant to FRCivP 26, ADR

L.R. 3-5, Civil L.R. 16-8 and 16-9 and Order of March 19, 2008 (Document 10) 

K:\Injured\106929\FED\Stip stay or cont (Hanna).wpd 3

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT

DEADLINES - C08-980-JSW

decision on the merits of the transfer. 

In the alternative, the parties hereby STIPULATE to and respectfully request that the

dates set forth in the Case Management Scheduling Order be vacated and continued pending the

outcome of the JPML’s decision on the merits of the transfer. Specifically, these deadlines1 in

this matter include the May 16, 2008 Rule 26 deadline to meet and confer, the May 16, 2008

deadline to file a Joint ADR Certification, the May 30, 2008 Deadline to complete Initial

Disclosures, the June 6, 2008 deadline to file the Joint Case Management Statement and the

June 13, 2008 Case Management Conference.

Dated: March 31, 2008 BRAYTON ̃PURCELL LLP 

 /s/ David R. Donadio

 

 By: __________________________ 

 David R. Donadio

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Dated: April 2, 2008 SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN &

ARNOLD, LLP

 /s/ Derek S. Johnson 

 By: __________________________ 

 Derek S. Johnson

Attorneys for Defendant 

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY

 Dated: March 31, 2008 YARON & ASSOCIATES

 /s/ George D. Yaron 

 By: __________________________ 

George D. Yaron 

Keith E. Patterson 

Attorneys for Defendant TODD

SHIPYARDS CORPORATION

Case 3:08-cv-00980-CRB Document 20 Filed 04/04/08 Page 3 of 4
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

K:\Injured\106929\FED\Stip stay or cont (Hanna).wpd 4

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT

DEADLINES - C08-980-JSW

Dated: April 1, 2008 BRYDON, HUGO & PARKER

 /s/ P.M. Bessette 

 By: __________________________ 

Edward R. Hugo

P.M. Bessette

Attorneys for Defendant 

NATIONAL STEEL AND 

SHIPBUILDING COMPANY 

 [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing date and deadlines specified in the Case

Management Scheduling Order filed February 15, 2008 (Document 3) , and the Order Setting

Case Management Conference and Requiring Joint Case Management Conference Statement,

filed March 19, 2008 (Document 10) are hereby VACATED and that this action is STAYED

pending the outcome of the JPML’s decision on the merits of the transfer. 

Dated: _____________________

_____________________________ . 

James S. White

United States District Judge

////

////

////

////

////

////

////

////

////

////

////

April 4, 2008

Case 3:08-cv-00980-CRB Document 20 Filed 04/04/08 Page 4 of 4