Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04898/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04898-21/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal

---

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 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

G&C AUTO BODY, INC., a California 

Corporation, and DIBBLE’S 

AUTOBODY, the Collision Works, a 

sole proprietorship, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE 

COMPANY, an Iowa corporation, 

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES 

INSURANCE COMPANY, a 

Maryland corporation, GEICO 

CASUALTY COMPANY, a 

Maryland corporation, and GEICO 

INDEMNITY COMPANY, a 

Maryland corporation, and DOES 1 

through 100, inclusive, 

Defendant. 

CASE NO. 3:06-CV-04898 (MJJ) 

Honorable James Larson 

Courtroom F 

[PROPOSED] ORDER TO DISMISS 

PORTIONS OF BOTH PLAINTIFFS’ 

AND GEICO’S MOTIONS TO 

COMPEL 

DATE: December 19, 2007 

TIME: 9:00 a.m. 

COURTROOM: F 

JUDGE: James Larson 

DATE OF REMOVAL: August 14, 2006 

TRIAL DATE: March 3, 2008 

 After reviewing the parties’ Stipulation and Joint Motion to Dismiss Portions of 

Both Plaintiffs’ and GEICO’s Motions to Compel filed on November 5 and 6, 2007, the 

Court orders that the Stipulation is GRANTED and the following portions of the parties’ 

Motions are withdrawn: 

1. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Production of Documents and Further 

Responses [Doc. #224]: Section I.A. at 3-4; Section I.B.2 at 6; Section I.B.3 at 6-7; 

Case 3:06-cv-04898-MJJ Document 282 Filed 12/05/2007 Page 1 of 2 Case 3:06-cv-04898-JSW Document 294 Filed 12/12/07 Page 1 of 2
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-

Section I.B.5 at 8; Section I.C.1 at 9-11; Section I.C.2 at 11-12; Section I.D. at 14; Section 

II. at 14-15; Section II. at 15-16. 

 GEICO will be responding to Sections I.B.1 at 4-6, I.B.4 at 7-8 and I.C.3 at 12-12 

of Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel. 

2. GEICO’s Motion to Compel Adequate Responses to Written Discovery

[Doc. #224]: Sections I and II at 3-9. 

Plaintiffs’ will be responding to Sections III & IV at 9-12 of GEICO’s Motion to 

Compel. 

____________________________ The Honorable James Larson 

 Chief Magistrate Judge United States District Court 

 Northern District of California 

 San Francisco Division 

Case 3:06-cv-04898-MJJ Document 282 Filed 12/05/2007 Page 2 of 2 Case 3:06-cv-04898-JSW Document 294 Filed 12/12/07 Page 2 of 2