Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02421/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02421-1/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

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KRYSTEN C.,

Plaintiff,

v.

BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-02421-RS 

ORDER RE BRIEFING AND 

SCHEDULING

This is an action under Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 

§1001 et seq. challenging a determination by defendant Blue Shield of California that, as of a 

particular point in time, plaintiff was no longer eligible to receive benefit coverage for residential 

inpatient treatment of her anorexia nervosa, major depressive disorder, and related conditions. A 

bench trial has been set for August 29, 2016.

Blue Shield has now noticed a motion for summary judgment for June 30, 2016. There are 

circumstances in ERISA cases where factual disputes render summary judgment for either side

unavailable. Because review ordinarily is based on the administrative record, however, a “bench 

trial” in these cases often is very similar to a hearing on cross-motions for summary judgment. 

Additionally, assuming plaintiff may wish to bring a motion for summary judgment as well, 

judicial efficiency is not served by entertaining six briefs on summary judgment, possibly 

followed by additional briefing in connection with the bench trial, if disputed factual issues 

emerge.

Case 3:15-cv-02421-RS Document 31 Filed 05/27/16 Page 1 of 2
CASE NO. 15-cv-02421-RS

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Accordingly, the June 30, 2016 hearing on the motion for summary judgment is vacated. 

Within 15 days of the date of this order, Blue Shield may, at its option, submit a supplementary 

brief of not more than 10 pages addressing any further issues it believes might arise in the event 

the Court concludes neither side is entitled to summary judgment. The parties shall then meet and 

confer to agree on a briefing schedule that provides for (1) plaintiff to submit an opposition to 

Blue Shield’s motion and briefing, combined with plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment 

and briefing on any bench trial issues; (2) Blue Shield to file a reply in support of its motion for 

summary judgment, combined with opposition to plaintiff’s cross-motion, and; (3) plaintiff to file 

a reply in support of its cross-motion. The parties may agree between themselves as to page 

length limitations, as long as none of the briefs exceed 30 pages. The schedule shall provide for 

briefing to be complete no later than August 12, 2016.

The matter will then be heard as previously scheduled on August 29, 2016 and will 

deemed to be either cross-motions for summary judgment, or a bench trial, depending on what 

appears appropriate in light of the record and the parties’ submissions. The further Case 

Management Conference previously set for June 16, 2016 and the Final Pretrial Conference set for 

August 11, 2016, are hereby both vacated.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 27, 2016

______________________________________

RICHARD SEEBORG

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-02421-RS Document 31 Filed 05/27/16 Page 2 of 2