Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05003/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05003-5/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

---

MANATT, PHELPS &

PHILLIPS, LLP 

ATTO RN EY S AT LA W

LO S A NG EL ES

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 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION 

TO DISMISS 

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-05003-WHO 

MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP

GREGORY N. PIMSTONE (Bar No. 150203) 

Email: gpimstone@manatt.com 

JOHN LEBLANC (Bar No. 155842) 

Email: jleblanc@manatt.com 

ILEANA M. HERNANDEZ (Bar No. 198906) 

Email: ihernandez@manatt.com 

LEAH R. ADAMS (Bar No. 266645) 

Email: ladams@manatt.com 

11355 West Olympic Boulevard 

Los Angeles, CA 90064-1614 

Telephone: (310) 312-4000 

Facsimile: (310) 312-4224 

Attorneys for Defendants 

CALIFORNIA PHYSICIANS’ SERVICE dba BLUE 

SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA, BLUE SHIELD OF 

CALIFORNIA LIFE AND HEALTH INSURANCE 

COMPANY 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

ARAM HOMAMPOUR, JOHN 

BARTELS, and JON NAKA on behalf of 

themselves and all others similarly situated, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CALIFORNIA PHYSICIANS’ SERVICE 

dba BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA, 

BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA LIFE 

AND HEALTH INSURANCE 

COMPANY, 

Defendant. 

No. 3:15-cv-05003-WHO

Hon. William H. Orrick 

STIPULATION AND 

ORDER TO SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO 

DISMISS 

Trial Date: None set 

Action filed: October 30, 2015

 

Case 3:15-cv-05003-WHO Document 53 Filed 10/26/16 Page 1 of 4
MANATT, PHELPS &

PHILLIPS, LLP 

ATTO RN EY S AT LA W

LO S A NG EL ES

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 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION 

TO DISMISS 

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-05003-WHO 

Plaintiffs Aram Homampour (“Homampour”), John Bartels (“Bartels”) and Jon Naka 

(“Naka”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) and Defendants California Physicians’ Service dba Blue 

Shield of California (“Blue Shield of California”) and Blue Shield of California Life and Health 

Insurance Company (“Blue Shield Life”) (collectively “Defendants”) stipulate, pursuant to Civil 

Local Rule 6-2, as follows: 

1. Plaintiff Homampour filed his Complaint against Blue Shield Life on October 30, 

2015 and served Blue Shield Life with the Complaint on November 13, 2015. 

2. On November 2, 2015, this Court set an initial case management conference 

(“CMC”) for February 2, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. 

3. On December 1, 2015, Plaintiff Homampour and Blue Shield Life filed a 

stipulation, pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(a), to extend the time for Blue Shield Life to respond to 

the initial Complaint, to and including January 8, 2016. 

4. On December 31, 2015, Plaintiff Homampour and Blue Shield Life filed a 

stipulation to the filing of a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) and to continue the initial case 

management conference. (Dkt. No. 14.) On January 4, 2016, the Court entered its Order on the 

stipulation. (Dkt. No. 15.) In the Order, the Court noted that, “[i]n the event [Blue Shield Life] 

moves to dismiss the FAC, the Court will entertain a stipulation to hold the Case Management 

Conference on the same date as the hearing on the motion.” 

5. On January 15, 2016, Plaintiff Homampour filed his FAC, adding Plaintiff Bartels 

and Naka and Defendant Blue Shield of California. (Dkt. No. 16.) 

6. On January 21, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation to further continue the initial 

case management conference to May 24, 2016, and to extend the time for Defendants to respond 

to the FAC until April 22, 2016. (Dkt. No. 21.) The Court entered its Order on the stipulation on 

January 25, 2016. (Dkt. No. 22.) 

7. The Court thereafter advanced the Initial Case Management Conference to 

May 17, 2016. (Dkt. No. 23.) 

Case 3:15-cv-05003-WHO Document 53 Filed 10/26/16 Page 2 of 4
MANATT, PHELPS &

PHILLIPS, LLP 

ATTO RN EY S AT LA W

LO S A NG EL ES

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 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION 

TO DISMISS 

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-05003-WHO 

8. On April 14, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation regarding Plaintiffs’ filing of a 

Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) and continuing the case management conference to 

June 14, 2016. (Dkt. No. 24.) The Court entered its Order on the stipulation on April 29, 2016. 

(Dkt. No. 25.) 

9. Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint on May 6, 2016. (Dkt. No. 26.) 

10. On May 26, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation to set a briefing schedule on 

Defendants’ forthcoming motion to dismiss the SAC and to continue the June 14, 2016 initial 

case management conference to the agreed-upon motion hearing date, August 10, 2016. (Dkt. No. 

27.) The Court entered its Order on the stipulation that day. (Dkt. No. 28.) 

11. Defendants’ motion to dismiss was heard on August 10, 2016, and the motion was 

taken under submission. The Court stated in its minutes that it would grant Plaintiffs leave to file 

an amended complaint two weeks after the parties’ scheduled September 19, 2016 mediation. 

(Dkt. No. 41.) 

12. On August 31, 2016, the Court issued its Order granting in part Defendants’ 

motion to dismiss. In the Order, the Court gave Plaintiffs 20 days to amend their complaint. (Dkt. 

No. 43.) 

13. On September 2, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation to allow Plaintiffs until 

October 3, 2016 to file their Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”). (Dkt. No. 44.) The Court 

entered its Order on the stipulation on September 6, 2016. (Dkt. No. 45.) 

14. On October 3, 2016, Plaintiffs filed their TAC. (Dkt. No. 46.) 

15. On October 17, 2016, the parties’ counsel met and conferred by telephone. 

Defendants informed Plaintiffs that Defendants intend to file a motion to dismiss the TAC. 

16. The parties agreed that Defendants’ motion to dismiss will be heard on 

Wednesday, December 14, 2016, at 2:00 p.m., or a date convenient to the Court. The parties also 

agreed to stipulate to a briefing schedule for Defendants’ motion to dismiss, due to the fact that 

the parties will also be briefing a motion to dismiss in the related action of Barbor v. California 

Case 3:15-cv-05003-WHO Document 53 Filed 10/26/16 Page 3 of 4
MANATT, PHELPS &

PHILLIPS, LLP 

ATTO RN EY S AT LA W

LO S A NG EL ES

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 4 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION 

TO DISMISS 

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-05003-WHO 

Physicians’ Service, Case No. 3:16-cv-01773-WHO, and because of the upcoming Thanksgiving 

holiday. 

17. The parties agreed upon the following briefing schedule: Plaintiffs’ opposition will 

be due on November 14, 2016, and Defendants’ reply will be due on December 5, 2016. 

SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: October 19, 2016 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP 

By: /s/ Ileana M. Hernandez 

Gregory Pimstone 

John LeBlanc 

Ileana M. Hernandez 

Leah R. Adams 

Attorneys for Defendants 

CALIFORNIA PHYSICIANS’ SERVICE 

dba BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA, 

BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA LIFE 

AND HEALTH INSURANCE 

COMPANY 

Dated: October 19, 2016 KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 

By: /s/ Timothy J. Rozelle 

Glenn R. Kantor 

Timothy J. Rozelle 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

ARAM HOMAMPOUR, JOHN 

BARTELS, and JON NAKA 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: _________________, 2016 

 Honorable William H. Orrick 

 United States District Judge 

Case 3:15-cv-05003-WHO Document 53 Filed 10/26/16 Page 4 of 4