Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-00668/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-00668-6/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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LORRAINE PLACIDO,

Plaintiff,

 v.

THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE

COMPANY OF AMERICA; NORTEL

NETWORKS LONG TERM DISABILITY

PLAN,

Defendants. /

No. C 09-00668 WHA

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

IN RECOVERY-OF-BENEFITS

ACTION UNDER ERISA 

After a case management conference, the Court enters the following order pursuant to

Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) and Civil Local Rule 16-10:

1. All initial disclosures under FRCP 26 must be completed by JANUARY 29, 2010, on

pain of preclusion under FRCP 37(c). 

2. Leave to add any new parties or pleading amendments must be sought by FEBRUARY

26, 2010. 

3. This is an action to recover disability benefits under ERISA. A threshold question is

the extent to which the “administrative record” should be augmented and/or discovery

allowed. To tee up this issue, the following procedure will be used. On APRIL 18,

2010, defendant shall file the “administrative record” and its motion for summary

judgment to be heard on a 35-day track. In this submission, please include a detailed 

Case 3:09-cv-00668-WHA Document 38 Filed 01/22/10 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

declaration explaining what is and is not in the “administrative record” and the manner

and guidelines by which it was compiled. Then, plaintiff's opposition and any request

for discovery shall be filed THREE WEEKS before the hearing with any reply thereto

TWO WEEKS before the hearing. Reply declarations will be disfavored. 

4. Depending on the outcome of the summary-judgment motion, this case may or may not

proceed further. If it does, a further case management order will issue. 

5. A further case management conference is set for JUNE 3, 2010 at 11:00 A.M.

6. After the case is over, please fill out the appended “Suggestions Box” memo on an

anonymous basis and send to Judge William Alsup, United States District Court,

450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California 94102. Your constructive

criticism will be most appreciated. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 21, 2010 WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-00668-WHA Document 38 Filed 01/22/10 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

3

SUGGESTIONS BOX

Judge Alsup invites views of any counsel or party on how to improve the

administration of justice in his courtroom. Please offer as much constructive criticism as you

wish. (If there is any practice you particularly wish to stay in place, such comments would

also be welcome.) Please do not identify yourself or your firm. Please comment on: 

1. Case management — 

2. Disclosure and discovery — 

3. Motion practice — 

4. Class actions and derivative actions — 

5. Trials — 

6. Fairness, bias, temperament, efficiency and demeanor — 

7. Is there anything else about our district court you would like to improve? 

Case 3:09-cv-00668-WHA Document 38 Filed 01/22/10 Page 3 of 3