Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-00982/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-00982-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 368
Nature of Suit: Asbestos Personal Injury - Prod.liab.
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury

---

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

K:\Injured\108190\Fed\Stip stay or cont (Cantlin).wpd 1

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO

CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES – C 08-00982-JCS 

BRAYTON

 ̃PURCELL LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

222 RUSH LANDING ROAD

P O BOX 6169

NOVATO, CALIFORNIA 94948-6169

(415) 898-1555

ALAN R. BRAYTON, ESQ., S.B. #73685

DAVID R. DONADIO, ESQ., S.B. #154436

FRANK J. ANDERS, ESQ., S.B. #227208

BRAYTON ̃PURCELL LLP 

Attorneys at Law

222 Rush Landing Road

P.O. Box 6169

Novato, California 94948-6169

(415) 898-1555

(415) 898-1247 (Fax No.)

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

DONALD CANTLIN, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

DONALD CANTLIN, JR.,

Plaintiff,

vs.

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, 

et al.,

Defendants.

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

No. C 08-00982-JCS

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO

STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE

ALTERNATIVE, TO CONTINUE CASE

MANAGEMENT DEADLINE AND

CONFERENCE, AND TO EXTEND TIME;

[PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY;

[PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE] ORDER

TO CONTINUE

Pursuant to Civil L. R. 7-11 and 7-12, the following parties hereby stipulate to, and

respectfully move the Court for, an Order extending time as set forth in the Case Management

Scheduling Order filed February 15, 2008 (Document 2) , for the following good cause:

On March 17, 2008, Defendant GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY filed Document 6, a

Notice to Tag Along Action regarding the pending Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL”) in the

Eastern District of Pennsylvania, seeking among other things, to move Jurisdiction of this matter

to that District. (Defendant GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY has faxed counsel copy of a

cover letter showing that this notice was mailed to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

(“JPML”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, said notice to the JPML from counsel being necessary

to initiate the transfer process.)

Case 3:08-cv-00982-CRB Document 13 Filed 04/16/08 Page 1 of 5
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

K:\Injured\108190\Fed\Stip stay or cont (Cantlin).wpd 2

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO

CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES – C 08-00982-JCS 

 On July 29, 1991, the JPML entered an order transferring all asbestos personal injury

cases pending in the federal courts to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of

Pennsylvania, for coordinated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. (In re Asbestos

Products Liability Litigation (no. VI). MDL No. 875., 771 F.Supp. 415 (1991)). That order also

applies to “tag-along actions,” or actions involving common questions of fact filed after January

17, 1991. Such actions are to be transferred to the eastern District of Pennsylvania as part of

MDL 875, for coordinated pretrial proceedings. 

The JPML has held that a district court has the authority to stay pending a transfer order.

In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1348, 1349 n.1 (J.P.M.L. 2001)

(“[T]hose courts concluding that such issues should be addressed by the transferee judge need

not rule on them, and the process of 1407 transfer in MDL-875 can continue without any

unnecessary interruption or delay.”)

The parties agree that it is likely that the JPML will transfer this matter to the Eastern

District of Pennsylvania. The Clerk of the JPML has not entered a Conditional Transfer Order

pursuant to JPML Rule 12(a) or filed an order to show cause why the action should not be

transferred, pursuant to JPML Rule 13(b). It is likely the dates set forth in the Case Management

Scheduling Order including the deadlines imposed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule

26, will pass before the Clerk of the JPML acts.

In addition, Plaintiff is attempting to serve Defendant CRAMP SHIPBUILDING AND

DRYDOCK COMPANY. 

The parties make this Motion on the grounds that a stay of this action would (a) promote

judicial efficiency, (b) allow consistency in pretrial rulings, and (c) be most convenient to the

parties. 

For the reasons above, the parties hereby STIPULATE to and respectfully request the

Court VACATE its Case Management Scheduling Order and that the Court issue an Order

STAYING this action pending the outcome of the MDL Panel’s decision on the merits of the

transfer. 

////

Case 3:08-cv-00982-CRB Document 13 Filed 04/16/08 Page 2 of 5
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

K:\Injured\108190\Fed\Stip stay or cont (Cantlin).wpd 3

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO

CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES – C 08-00982-JCS 

In the alternative, the parties hereby STIPULATE to and respectfully request that this

Court vacate and continue the dates set forth in the Case Management Scheduling Order pending

the outcome of the JPML’s decision on the merits of the transfer. 

Dated: April 9, 2008 BRAYTON ̃PURCELL LLP 

 /s/ David R. Donadio 

 

 By: __________________________ 

 David R. Donadio

 Attorneys for Plaintiff

Dated: April 9, 2008 SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN & 

 ARNOLD, LLP

 /s/ Derek S. Johnson 

 By: __________________________ 

Derek S. Johnson

Attorneys for Defendant 

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY 

Dated: April 9, 2008 CARROLL, BURDICK & MCDONOUGH LLP

 /s/ John G. Lee 

 By: __________________________ 

John G. Lee

Attorneys for Defendant 

WARREN PUMPS LLC

Case 3:08-cv-00982-CRB Document 13 Filed 04/16/08 Page 3 of 5
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

K:\Injured\108190\Fed\Stip stay or cont (Cantlin).wpd 4

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO

CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES – C 08-00982-JCS 

 [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing date and deadlines specified in the Case

Management Scheduling Order filed February 15, 2008 are hereby VACATED and that this

action is STAYED pending the outcome of the JPML’s decision on the merits of the transfer. 

Dated: _____________________

_____________________________ . 

Joseph C. Spero

United States Magistrate Judge 

[PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE] ORDER TO CONTINUE

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing date and deadlines specified in the Case

Management Scheduling Order filed February 15, 2008, are hereby VACATED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following case management deadlines are

continued as follows: 

1. The Case Management Conference is set for [a date after September 1, 2008 to

wit:] ______________, 2008; at _____________ __.m., Courtroom ____, _____th Floor, 450

Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California.

2. Last day to meet and confer regarding initial disclosures, early settlement, ADR

process selection, and discovery plan is set for 21 days before the Case Management Conference

as set forth in paragraph 1, above.

3. Last day to file Joint ADR Certification with Stipulation to ADR Process or

Notice of Need for ADR Phone Conference is set for 21 days before the Case Management

Conference as set forth in paragraph 1, above.

////

////

////

////

////

September 19 1:30 p A 15

Case 3:08-cv-00982-CRB Document 13 Filed 04/16/08 Page 4 of 5
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

K:\Injured\108190\Fed\Stip stay or cont (Cantlin).wpd 5

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO

CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES – C 08-00982-JCS 

4. Last day to complete initial disclosures or state objection to Rule 26(f) Report,

file/serve Case Management Statement and file/serve Rule 26(f) Report is set for five court days

before the Case Management Conference as set forth in paragraph 1, above. 

Dated: _____________________

_____________________________ . 

Joseph C. Spero

United States Magistrate Judge 

April 15, 2008

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

Judge Joseph C. Spero

Case 3:08-cv-00982-CRB Document 13 Filed 04/16/08 Page 5 of 5