Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-00438/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-00438-1/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

1 The holding of this court is limited to the facts and the particular circumstances

underlying the present motion.

2 As used herein, “1998 Master Labor Agreement” refers to the agreement attached as

Exhibit 1 to the Second Declaration of Joan Gibbons in Support of Motion for Default Judgment.

3 The“Memorandum of Understanding” attached as Exhibit 2 to the Gibbons Declaration,

which issigned, refers generically to a “Master Labor Agreement” and specifically to a master agreement

that was in effect immediately prior to July 1, 1986. It does not indicate that the 1998 version was ever

executed, nor mention any 1998 version of the master agreement at all.

ORDER, page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

TRUSTEES OF THE U.A. LOCAL 393

PENSION FUND AND THE U.A. LOCAL

393 HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST

FUND,

Plaintiff,

v.

RAMCON COMPANY, INC.,

Defendant.

___________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: C 05-0438 PVT

INTERIM ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS’

MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

On May 25, 2005, Plaintiff filed a revised motion for default judgment against Defendant

Ramcom Company, Inc. (“Ramcon”).1 Having reviewed the motion papers, the court finds it

appropriate to issue this interim order seeking additional briefing. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that no later than August 1, 2005, Plaintiff shall file: 1) a

supplemental declaration attaching either a signed copy of the 1998 Master Labor Agreement2 or

other proof that that Master Labor Agreement was actually entered into by the parties;3 and 2) a

Case 5:05-cv-00438-JW Document 37 Filed 07/17/06 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

ORDER, page 2

supplemental brief addressing the issue of why the operative agreement should be interpreted so as to

entitle Plaintiff to liquidated damages of 20% of all post filing delinquent monthly payments, as

opposed to the usual liquidated damages of $250. While the court agrees that the liquidated damages

should be 20% for amounts that were overdue on the day this action was filed, it does not appear

from the language of the agreement that the increased rate of liquidated damages applies to later

delinquencies.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing on this motion is continued to 10:00 a.m. on

August 8, 2006.

Dated: 7/17/06

 

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:05-cv-00438-JW Document 37 Filed 07/17/06 Page 2 of 2