Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00627/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00627-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 28:1132 E.R.I.S.A.

---

SC1 17061822.2 

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

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 

William M. Brown (State Bar No.: 127562) 

Diana L. Rachal (State Bar No.: 221389) 

400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350 

Sacramento, California 95814-4428 

Telephone: (916) 448-0159 

Facsimile: (916) 558-4839 

Attorneys for Defendant 

DST OUTPUT OF CALIFORNIA, INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BILL RANDALL, 

 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF 

AMERICA, UNUMPROVIDENT, OTS and/or 

OUTPUT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS 

and/or DST INNOVIS LONG TERM 

DISABILITY PLAN, OTS, OUTPUT 

TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, and DST 

INNOVIS, 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 2:05-cv-00627 MCE GGH 

STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME TO 

RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S 

COMPLAINT

DST related parties captioned above (“DST”) and plaintiff Bill Randall, hereby stipulate 

that DST has an additional thirty (30) days to respond to plaintiff’s complaint. DST’s response 

is now due on July 8, 2005. 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 2:05-cv-00627-MCE -GGH Document 8 Filed 06/09/05 Page 1 of 3
-2- 

SC1 17061822.2 

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

The parties have stipulated to a prior thirty (30) day extension of time and, therefore, 

request court approval of this second stipulated extension as required by Local Rule 6-144. The 

additional 30 days are necessary for DST and UNUM Life to work out issues regarding the 

defense of this action. 

DATED: June ___, 2005 SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 

By 

 Diana L. Rachal 

Attorneys for Defendant 

DST RELATED PARTIES 

DATED: June ___, 2005 LAW OFFICES OF JESSE S. KAPLAN 

By 

 Jesse S. Kaplan 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

BILL RANDALL 

Case 2:05-cv-00627-MCE -GGH Document 8 Filed 06/09/05 Page 2 of 3
-3- 

SC1 17061822.2 

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

ORDER 

Good cause appearing therefore, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court approves the Parties’ Stipulation Extending 

Time to Respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint. DST related parties, including OTS and/or OUTPUT 

TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS and/or DST INNOVIS LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN, 

OTS, OUTPUT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, and DST INNOVIS, will have until July 8, 

2005 to file a response. 

No further continuances will be granted for the filing of a responsive pleading. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 9, 2005 

__________________________________ 

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:05-cv-00627-MCE -GGH Document 8 Filed 06/09/05 Page 3 of 3