Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-01375/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-01375-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Benefits

---

-1- CASE NO. CV 08-01375 PJH

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DISPOSITIVE

MOTIONS

OHS West:260843235.1

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

SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN & ARNOLD LLP

REBECCA A. HULL Bar No. 99802

MICHELLE Y. MCISAAC Bar No. 215294

One Market Plaza

Steuart Tower, 8th Floor

San Francisco, California 94105

Telephone: (415) 781-7900

Facsimile: (415) 781-2635

Attorneys for Defendants

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and

Bank of America Long Term Disability Benefits Plan

(erroneously sued as Bank of America Long Term Disability Plan)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Defendants Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”) and Bank of America

Long Term Disability Benefits Plan (“defendants” herein) and Plaintiff Lena Monzon Ramos, by

and through their attorneys of record, hereby agree and stipulate as follows:

1. On January 29, 2010, this Court issued its Order regarding the standard of review,

which also clarifies whether Plaintiff may be permitted to offer evidence from outside the

administrative record (which generally is permissible only if review is for abuse of discretion).

(Doc. 63). The Order determined that the abuse of discretion standard applies, and Plaintiff

therefore now intends to pursue pending discovery disputes that the parties had agreed to defer

while awaiting the Court’s ruling on plaintiff’s motion regarding the standard of review.

2. The parties anticipate that some of the issues raised in the pending discovery

LENA MONZON RAMOS,

Plaintiff,

v.

BANK OF AMERICA; METROPOLITAN

LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; BANK

OF AMERICA LONG TERM

DISABILITY PLAN,

Defendants.

CASE NO. CV 08-01375 PJH

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER TO EXTEND BRIEFING

SCHEDULE FOR DISPOSITIVE

MOTIONS

Case 4:08-cv-01375-PJH Document 65 Filed 02/17/10 Page 1 of 3
-2- CASE NO. CV 08-01375 PJH

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DISPOSITIVE

MOTIONS

OHS West:260843235.1

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

disputes will require resolution by the Court, which in turn will require that the parties brief the

issues in a noticed motion or motions. The parties are in agreement that such issues should be

briefed and resolved prior to briefing on the substance of plaintiff’s claim, in the interest of

judicial economy and preservation of party and Court resources.

3. The parties further agree that, if the anticipated motion is successful in any

appreciable degree, it will be necessary for the parties then to be permitted a reasonable period of

time in which to complete any discovery procedures that may have been ordered in response to

the plaintiff’s motion for discovery.

4. In light of all of the foregoing, and counsel’s respective trial calendars, the parties

have met and conferred regarding a schedule for briefing and hearing on the parties’ substantive

motions, have stipulated to, and request that the Court order, following briefing and hearing

schedule:

Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s opening briefs due August 18, 2010

Opposition Memoranda due September 1, 2010

Reply Memoranda due: September 15, 2010

Hearing on cross motions: September 29, 2010 or the

earliest date thereafter that is

convenient to the Court

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Date: February 12, 2010 ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP

By /s/ Kristen M. Jacoby

Patricia K. Gillette

Kristen M. Jacoby

Attorneys For Defendant

Bank Of America Group Benefits Program

Case 4:08-cv-01375-PJH Document 65 Filed 02/17/10 Page 2 of 3
-3- CASE NO. CV 08-01375 PJH

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DISPOSITIVE

MOTIONS

OHS West:260843235.1

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

DATED: February 12, 2010 SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN & ARNOLD LLP

By: /s/ Michelle Y. McIsaac

Rebecca A. Hull

Michelle Y. McIsaac

Attorneys for Defendants

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and Bank of

America Long Term Disability Benefits Plan

DATED: February 12, 2010 THE LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH CREITZ, P.C.

By: /s/ Joseph Creitz

Joseph Creitz

Attorney for Plaintiff

Lena Monzon Ramos

ORDER

Upon the stipulation of the parties, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

2/17/10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton

Case 4:08-cv-01375-PJH Document 65 Filed 02/17/10 Page 3 of 3