Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03294/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03294-3/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

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

SANDRA BREBER,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP GROUP

ACCIDENT AND HEALTH INSURANCE

PLAN,

Defendant.

 /

No. C 05-03294 JSW

ORDER RE STANDARD OF

REVIEW

On April 6, 2005, the parties filed a stipulation providing that Plaintiff’s claim for

benefits under Section 502(a)(1)(B) of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B), should be reviewed

by this Court de novo. On April 20, 2006, the Court issued an order directing the parties to

further supplement their stipulation in order to clarify what underlying facts they stipulate to

which warrant the application of de novo review to Plaintiff’s claims. In response, Defendant

Arthur Andersen LLP Group Long Term Disability Insurance Plan (the “Plan”) explained that it

could not agree to facts which would require the Court to review Plaintiff’s claim de novo. 

Rather, the Plan is willing to stipulate that the Court apply the stricter standard of review to

promote judicial economy and minimize the parties’ litigation expenses. Accordingly, because

both parties agree that the Court may review Plaintiff’s claim de novo, and because determining

in advance that it will apply the de novo standard will conserve resources of the parties and the

Court, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that it will review Plaintiff’s claim de novo. The Court 

Case 3:05-cv-03294-JSW Document 19 Filed 05/01/06 Page 1 of 2
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

FURTHER ORDERS that: (1) Plaintiff’s pending discovery requests are rendered MOOT by

this Order and thus, the Plan is not obligated to provide responses; (2) the parties will not

conduct any discovery in connection with this action; (3) the hearing on the standard of review

and the further Case Management Conference currently set for August 25, 2006 are VACATED;

and (4) the last day to hear dispositive motions is set for August 25, 2006. If both parties intend

to file motions for summary judgment, they shall meet and confer and submit a briefing

schedule to the Court. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 1, 2006 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-03294-JSW Document 19 Filed 05/01/06 Page 2 of 2