Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04343/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04343-0/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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DEBORAH RANDALL,

Plaintiff,

v.

METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE 

COMPANY, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-04343-JST 

SCHEDULING ORDER

The Court hereby sets the following case deadlines pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 16 and Civil Local Rule 16-10:

Event Deadline

Deadline to add parties or amend the pleadings February 10, 2016

Discovery deadline and discover motion cutoff October 6, 2016

Opening Briefs (cross motions for summary judgment) November 10, 2016

Opposition Briefs (cross motions for summary judgment) November 23, 2016

Reply Briefs (cross motions for summary judgment) December 1, 2016

Hearing on cross motions for summary judgment December 15, 2016

at 2:00 p.m.

Counsel may not modify these dates without leave of court. The parties shall comply with 

the Court’s standing orders, which are available at cand.uscourts.gov/jstorders.

The parties must take all necessary steps to conduct discovery, compel discovery, hire 

counsel, retain experts, and manage their calendars so that they can complete discovery in a timely 

Case 3:15-cv-04343-JST Document 28 Filed 01/27/16 Page 1 of 2
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

manner and appear at trial on the noticed and scheduled dates. All counsel must arrange their 

calendars to accommodate these dates, or arrange to substitute or associate in counsel who can. 

The hearing date on cross motions for summary judgment set by this Court should be 

regarded as firm. Requests for continuance are disfavored. The Court will not consider any event 

subsequently scheduled by a party, party-controlled witness, expert or attorney that conflicts with 

the above date as good cause to grant a continuance. The Court will not consider the pendency of 

settlement discussions as good cause to grant a continuance. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 27, 2016

 _____________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-04343-JST Document 28 Filed 01/27/16 Page 2 of 2