Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-05865/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-05865-0/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

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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO PERMIT PLAINTIFF TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT

AND TO CONTINUE DATES (Case No. 06-05865 CW) PAGE 1

Daniel M. Feinberg– CA State Bar No. 135983

 dfeinberg@lewisfeinberg.com

Cassie Springer-Sullivan – CA State Bar No. 221506

 cssullivan@lewisfeinberg.com

Margaret E. Hasselman – CA State Bar No. 228529

 mhasselman@lewisfeinberg.com

LEWIS, FEINBERG, RENAKER & JACKSON, P.C.

1330 Broadway, Suite 1800

Oakland, CA 94612

Telephone: (510) 839-6824

Facsimile: (510) 839-7839

Attorneys for Plaintiff

(ADDITIONAL COUNSEL LISTED BELOW)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID CAPLAN,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CNA INTEGRATED DISABILITY

PROGRAM PLAN; THE HARTFORD

FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC.; and

CONTINENTAL ASSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. C06-5865 CW

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER TO PERMIT PLAINTIFF TO

FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT

AND TO CONTINUE DATES

ADDITIONAL COUNSEL:

SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN & ARNOLD LLP

Bruce D. Celebrezze – CA State Bar No. 102181

 bruce.celebrezze@sdma.com

Dennis G. Rolstad – CA State Bar No. 150006

 dennis.rolstad@sdma.com

Michelle Y. McIsaac– CA State Bar No. 215294

 michelle.mcisaac@sdma.com

One Market Plaza

Steuart Tower, 8 Floor th

Case 4:06-cv-05865-CW Document 19 Filed 11/28/06 Page 1 of 6
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO PERMIT PLAINTIFF TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT

AND TO CONTINUE DATES (Case No. 06-05865 CW) PAGE 2

San Francisco, California 94105

Telephone: (415) 781-7900

Facsimile: (415) 781-2635

Attorneys for Defendant 

Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.

GALTON & HELM LLP

Daniel W. Maguire – CA State Bar No. 120002

 dmaguire@galtonhelm.com

Michael B. Bernacchi – CA State Bar No. 163657

 mbernacchi@galtonhelm.com

500 South Grand Avenue, Suite 1200

Los Angeles, California 90071-2624

Telephone: (213) 629-8800

Facsimile: (213) 629-0037

Attorneys for Defendants

CNA Integrated Disability Program Plan and

Continental Assurance Company

//

//

WHEREAS Plaintiff filed his complaint on September 22, 2006;

WHEREAS the Court issued a scheduling order as follows:

Date Event

December 1, 2006 Meet and Confer re: initial disclosures, early settlement,

ADR process selection, and discovery plan

December 1, 2006 File ADR Certification signed by Parties and Counsel

December 1, 2006 File either Stipulation to ADR Process or Notice of Need

for ADR Phone Conference 

December 15, 2006 Last day to complete initial disclosures or state objection in

Rule 26(f) Report, file Case Management Statement, and

file Rule 26(f) Report

December 22, 2006 Initial Case Management Conference in Courtroom 2,

Oakland at 1:30 PM;

WHEREAS on October 17, 2006, Plaintiff and Defendant Hartford Financial Services

Case 4:06-cv-05865-CW Document 19 Filed 11/28/06 Page 2 of 6
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO PERMIT PLAINTIFF TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT

AND TO CONTINUE DATES (Case No. 06-05865 CW) PAGE 3

Group (“Hartford”) stipulated that all defendants would have an extension until November 2,

2006 to file a responsive pleading;

WHEREAS on November 2, 2006, Plaintiff and Defendant Hartford stipulated that

Defendants CNA Integrated Disability Program Plan (“the Plan”) and Continental Assurance

Company (“Continental”) would have a further extension until November 17, 2006 to file a

responsive pleading;

WHEREAS on November 14, 2006, Plaintiff and Defendants the Plan and Continental

stipulated that the Plan and Continental would have a further extension until November 27, 2006

to file a responsive pleading;

WHEREAS Defendant Hartford noticed a Motion to Dismiss and a Motion for Summary

Judgment for December 22, 2006, at 10:00 AM;

WHEREAS some Defendants have indicated that they will provide information to

Plaintiff by December 18, 2006 which may suggest that Plaintiff should, depending on the

content of that information, amend the complaint to bring concurrent state law claims against an

additional defendant, as well as address Defendant Hartford’s contention in its Motion for

Summary Judgment that the incorrect Hartford entity was named, pursuant to the Declaration of

Jeffery P. Apuzzo filed in support of Hartford’s Motion for Summary Judgment;

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties to this action, by and through their undersigned

attorneys, hereby stipulate and respectfully request the Court to order as follows:

1. Plaintiff David Caplan will file a First Amended Complaint by December 29,

2006.

2. All Defendants who have appeared in this action will have 10 days after service of

the First Amended Complaint to file a responsive pleading, pursuant to

Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a). 

3. Specifically, Defendants the Plan and Continental, whose answer was previously

due by November 27, 2006, will have an extension to file a responsive pleading

until 10 days after service of the First Amended Complaint, pursuant to

Case 4:06-cv-05865-CW Document 19 Filed 11/28/06 Page 3 of 6
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO PERMIT PLAINTIFF TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT

AND TO CONTINUE DATES (Case No. 06-05865 CW) PAGE 4

Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a).

4. If any new defendants are named in the First Amended Complaint, those

defendants will have 20 days following service to file a responsive pleading,

pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(1)(A).

5. If any new defendants named in the First Amended Complaint are represented by

counsel who have already appeared in this action, those counsel will agree to

accept service of the First Amended Complaint through their attorneys by

facsimile and U.S. Mail, to waive the additional 40 days ordinarily allotted to

defendants so served pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(a)(B), and will instead file a

responsive pleading within 20 days of service of the First Amended Complaint.

6. All previously scheduled court-ordered dates and noticed motion dates are

continued as follows:

Original Date Event New Date

12/1/2006 Meet and Confer re: initial disclosures, 2/2/2007

early settlement, ADR process selection, 

and discovery plan

12/1/2006 File ADR Certification signed by Parties 2/2/2007

and Counsel

12/1/2006 File either Stipulation to ADR Process or Notice 2/2/2007

of Need for ADR Phone Conference 

12/1/2006 Last day for Plaintiff to file an Opposition to 2/2/2007

Defendant Hartford’s Motion for Summary

Judgment and Motion to Dismiss

12/8/2006 Last day for Defendant Hartford to file a Reply 2/9/2007

Brief in Support of Hartford’s Motion for 

Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss

12/15/2006 Last day to complete initial disclosures or state 2/16/2007

Case 4:06-cv-05865-CW Document 19 Filed 11/28/06 Page 4 of 6
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO PERMIT PLAINTIFF TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT

AND TO CONTINUE DATES (Case No. 06-05865 CW) PAGE 5

objection in Rule 26(f) Report, file Case 

Management Statement, and file Rule 26(f) Report

12/22/2006 Initial Case Management Conference in 2/23/2007, 10:00 AM

Courtroom 2, Oakland at 1:30 PM;

12/22/2006 Hearing on Defendant Hartford’s Motion for 2/23/2007, 10:00 AM

Summary Judgment at 10:00 AM

12/22/2006 Hearing on Defendant Hartford’s Motion to 2/23/2007, 10:00 AM

Dismiss at 10:00 AM

7. The February 23, 2007 Case Management Conference will be held immediately

after the 10:00 AM hearing on Defendants’ motions, rather than at 1:30 PM that

same day.

Dated: November 21, 2006 LEWIS, FEINBERG, 

RENAKER & JACKSON P.C.

By: _/S/______________________________

Cassie Springer-Sullivan

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Dated: November 21, 2006 SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN &

ARNOLD LLP

By: _/S/______________________________

Dennis G. Rolstad

Attorneys for Defendant 

Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.

Dated: November 21, 2006 GALTON & HELM LLP

By: _/S/______________________________

Michael B. Bernacchi

Attorneys for Defendants

CNA Integrated Disability Program Plan and

Continental Assurance Company

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _________, 2006 _______________________________

Honorable Claudia Wilken 

United States District Court

11/28

Case 4:06-cv-05865-CW Document 19 Filed 11/28/06 Page 5 of 6
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO PERMIT PLAINTIFF TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT

AND TO CONTINUE DATES (Case No. 06-05865 CW) PAGE 6

I hereby attest that I have on file all holograph signatures for any signatures indicated by a

"conformed" signature (/S/) within this efiled document.

_/S/______________________________

Cassie Springer-Sullivan

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 4:06-cv-05865-CW Document 19 Filed 11/28/06 Page 6 of 6