Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-01788/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-01788-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 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 

CBM-SAC\SA051390.1 

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE (CIV-S-01-1788 DFL GGH) 

James W. Henderson, Jr., No. 071170 

Tania H. Colderbank, No. 213675 

CARROLL, BURDICK & McDONOUGH LLP

Attorneys at Law 

1007 – 7th Street, Suite 200 

Sacramento, CA 95814-3409 

Telephone: 916.446.5297 

Facsimile: 916.446.4487 

Attorneys for Defendant 

USI ADMINISTRATORS, INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SACRAMENTO DIVISION 

DAMERON HOSPITAL 

ASSOCIATION, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

USI ADMINISTRATORS, INC. and 

DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, 

Defendants. 

No. CIV - S- 01-1788 RRB GGH 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

CONTINUING TRIAL DATE AND 

RELATED PRETRIAL DEADLINES 

Complaint Filed: January 17, 2001 

Trial Date: March 10, 2008 

THE HONORABLE RALPH R. BEISTLINE

This is an action in which the plaintiff, DAMERON HOSPITAL 

ASSOCIATION (hereinafter “DAMERON”), seeks to recover damages for monetary 

amounts it claims that it was allegedly improperly required to pay for its employee health 

benefits program administered by the defendant USI ADMINISTRATORS, INC. 

(hereinafter “USIA”). Specifically, DAMERON alleges that USIA improperly calculated 

the amount that DAMERON paid for charges incurred through the health benefits 

program it provided its employees and their dependents for the years 1999 and 2000. 

The claims asserted require the review of the individual medical claims for 

hundreds of DAMERON employees and dependents during this two-year period. USIA 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:01-cv-01788-JAM-GGH Document 22 Filed 07/31/07 Page 1 of 4
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 

CBM-SAC\SA051390.1 -2- 

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE (CIV-S-01-1788 DFL GGH) 

has produced thousands of pages of documents relating to the claims which it processed 

for DAMERON employees and dependants during the period in question. However, 

further investigation has revealed that additional documents need to be located and 

reviewed, including the actual worksheets for the individual claims when they were 

processed by USIA. Unfortunately, these additional records are not accessible via 

computer, but rather consist of the original individual invoices and worksheets generated 

when the billings were received by USIA. In the course of attempting to locate these 

documents, counsel for USIA has been advised that they are most likely in a storage 

facility in the Stockton area. Furthermore, these records are not filed by reference to 

DAMERON HOSPITAL or even the name of the employee or dependent. Rather, they 

are intermingled with claims that USIA was processing in the Stockton office for other 

clients as well. Thus, these documents must be retrieved by reviewing a much larger 

amount of records for the period in question. The difficulties in locating and reviewing 

the information are further intensified by virtue of the fact that none of the individuals 

working in the USIA Stockton office are still employed by USIA. 

As previously indicated to the Court, the parties have held several mediation 

hearings with John Bates of JAMS in an attempt to resolve the issues of this lawsuit. 

However, during the mediation it became clear that there were significant issues as to the 

nature and extent of the claimed overcharges and the methods for determining and 

calculating the alleged damages. Accordingly, it was decided at that time to continue the 

mediation hearing to give the parties additional time to locate additional documentary 

evidence and to discuss the issues with the experts. This additional work from the 

standpoint of the defendant included several hours of searching for original billing records 

in a large warehouse in Stockton. 

With a focus towards the mediation, the parties have continued to refrain from 

formal discovery and have been voluntarily exchanging information. Samples of 

additional billing records for the two-year period in question have been reviewed and 

analyzed extensively by both sides. This process has taken additional time. 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:01-cv-01788-JAM-GGH Document 22 Filed 07/31/07 Page 2 of 4
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 

CBM-SAC\SA051390.1 -3- 

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE (CIV-S-01-1788 DFL GGH) 

The parties have requested prior extensions from this Court to facilitate the 

mediation process. At the time that the last extension was requested, it was indicated that 

the parties intended to proceed with a follow-up mediation with John Bates and mediation 

has continued in this matter. However, at the last mediation session, new issues have been 

raised relating to damages, which have required additional investigation and analysis by 

the parties. In addition, issues regarding insurance coverage have arisen between USIA 

and its insurance carrier. USIA is currently attempting to resolve these issues. 

Both sides recognize that if the mediation is unsuccessful, the remaining 

discovery, including expert witnesses, will be extremely costly to both sides, to say 

nothing of the costs of conducting a trial on this matter. If the mediation is successful, the 

case will of course be taken off calendar. 

Accordingly, and for the reasons stated above, the parties hereby stipulate and 

request that the Court issue an Order amending the Court’s previous Status (Pre-trial 

Scheduling) Order of December 7, 2001 and setting the following new dates in this 

matter: 

Old Date: New Date: 

Expert Disclosure August 10, 2007 June 12, 2008 

Rebuttal Expert Disclosure August 31, 2007 July 3, 2008 

Discovery Cutoff October 12, 2007 August 11, 2008

Last Day to File 

 Dispositive Motions November 21, 2007 October 1, 2008 

Last Hearing Date for December 19, 2007 October 29, 2008 

 Dispositive Motions 

 

Final Pretrial Conference February 1, 2007 December 5, 2008 

2:00 p.m. 2:00 p.m. 

Trial Date March 10, 2008 January 12, 2009 

8:30 a.m. 9:00 a.m. 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:01-cv-01788-JAM-GGH Document 22 Filed 07/31/07 Page 3 of 4
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 

CBM-SAC\SA051390.1 -4- 

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE (CIV-S-01-1788 DFL GGH) 

I hereby agree to the terms of the above Stipulation. 

Dated: KROLOFF BELCHER SMART PERRY and 

CHRISTOPHERSON 

By: /s/ 

Allison C. Lafferty 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

I hereby agree to the terms of the above Stipulation. 

Dated: CARROLL, BURDICK & McDONOUGH LLP 

By: /s/ 

James W. Henderson, Jr. 

Attorneys for Defendant 

ORDER

It is so ordered. 

DATED: July 31, 2007 

/s/ Ralph R. Beistline_____________________

HON. RALPH R. BEISTLINE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:01-cv-01788-JAM-GGH Document 22 Filed 07/31/07 Page 4 of 4