Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-05093/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-05093-1/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

---

{03938587.2}Case No.: 3:16-cv05093 JST

1 JOINT STIPULATION AND

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE:

STANDARD OF REVIEW

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

Brian H. Kim (State Bar No. 215492) 

Emily A. Bolt (State Bar No. 253109) 

James P. Keenley (State Bar No. 253106) 

BOLT KEENLEY KIM LLP

1010 Grayson Street, Suite Three

Berkeley, California 94710 

Phone: (510) 225-0696 

Fax: (510) 225-1095 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JUSTIN EMERSON, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE 

COMPANY, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 3:16-cv-05093 JST

JOINT STIPULATION AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: STANDARD 

OF REVIEW

JOINT STIPULATION

The parties have reached the following agreement which they jointly request be entered 

as an order of this Court governing further proceedings: 

(1) The parties agree that the standard of review applicable to the Plaintiff’s claim is 

de novo for purposes of the trial of this case only; 

(2) Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s (“MetLife”) stipulation to de novo

standard of review in this case is for the purposes of the trial of this case only and without 

Case 3:16-cv-05093-JST Document 27 Filed 02/21/17 Page 1 of 2
{03938587.2}Case No.: 3:16-cv05093 JST

2 JOINT STIPULATION AND

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE:

STANDARD OF REVIEW

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

reference to the appropriate standard of review in any other case. MetLife’s stipulation on the 

standard of review should not be construed as a concession that a de novo standard of review is 

applicable in any other pending cases against MetLife. 

Dated: February 16, 2017 

BOLT KEENLEY KIM LLP

By: /s/ Brian H. Kim

Brian H. Kim

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Dated: February 16, 2017 

MAYNARD, COOPER & GALE, LLP

By: /s/ Linda B. Oliver

Linda B. Oliver

Alexandra Drury

Attorneys for Defendant METROPOLITAN 

LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the stipulation set forth above, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February 21, 2017 

 Hon. Jon S. Tigar 

 United States District Court 

 

Case 3:16-cv-05093-JST Document 27 Filed 02/21/17 Page 2 of 2