Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-05382/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-05382-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

Jonathan Landes,

Plaintiff,

 v.

Intel Corp.’s Long Term Disability Plan,

Defendant. /

NO. C 08-05382 JW 

SCHEDULING ORDER

This case is scheduled for a Case Management Conference on May 3, 2010. Pursuant to the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules of this Court, the parties conferred and duly

submitted a Joint Case Management Statement. (hereafter, “Statement,” Docket Item No. 323.)

On January 20, 2010 the Court issued an Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part CrossMotions for Summary Judgment. (hereafter, “January 20 Order,” Docket Item No. 28.) In its

January 20 Order, the Court remanded the case for determination of Plaintiff’s claim of long-term

disability benefits, and directed the Plan Administrator to articulate the basis of any determination

and award benefits accordingly. (January 20 Order at 14-15.) In the event that the Plan

Administrator’s reevaluation of Plaintiff’s long-term disability determination resulted in a finding

that benefits are not due to Plaintiff, the Court ordered Defendant to provide an explanation

including the specific reasons for the adverse determination and formally file its determination with

the Court for review. (Id.) On April 19, 2010, Defendant filed a Notice of Lodging Benefits

Determination. (See Docket Item No. 29.)

Case 5:08-cv-05382-JW Document 31 Filed 04/28/10 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 2

In their Statement, the parties represent that there is no need for further discovery or trial in

this matter, and request that the Case Management Conference be vacated. (Statement at 3-5.) In

light of the parties’ representations, the Court VACATES the Case Management Conference and

orders as follows:

(1) On or before May 7, 2010, Plaintiff shall file a brief Reply to the Plan

Administrator’s determination of benefits. Plaintiff’s Reply shall not exceed fifteen

pages in length.

(2) Upon Plaintiff’s filing of his Reply, the matter shall be deemed submitted for the

Court’s review.

Dated: April 27, 2010 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge

Case 5:08-cv-05382-JW Document 31 Filed 04/28/10 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:

James Gerald Mellen jgmellen@hotmail.com

Joseph E. Lambert josephlambert@cox.net

Michael W. Pott mpott@porterscott.com

Timothy J. Fricker tjfricker@gmail.com

Dated: April 27, 2010 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: /s/ JW Chambers 

Elizabeth Garcia

Courtroom Deputy

Case 5:08-cv-05382-JW Document 31 Filed 04/28/10 Page 3 of 3