Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02053/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02053-0/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.

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERALD SMALLEY, ) 

) 2:06-cv-2053-GEB-EFB

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF

) TO FILE A SUPPLEMENTAL

ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP; ) STATUS REPORT

ASTRAZENECA LONG TERM DISABILITY )

INSURANCE PLAN; ASTRAZENECA )

ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE; HIGH )

MARK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; )

BROADSPIRE INTEGRATED DISABILITY )

MANAGEMENT; BROADSPIRE SERVICES )

INC.; BROADSPIRE ADMINISTRATOR )

SERVICES, INC., )

)

Defendants. )

)

The September 15, 2006, Order Setting Status (Pretrial

Scheduling) Conference (“September 15 Order”) scheduled a status

conference in this case for December 18, 2006, and required the

parties to file a joint status report (“JSR”) no later than fourteen

days prior to the scheduling conference. The September 15 Order

further required that a status report be filed regardless of whether a 

joint report could be procured. (September 15 Order at 2 n.1.) On

December 4, 2006, a JSR was filed in which “Plaintiff contends [that]

all Defendants have been served . . . .” (JSR at 2.) However, only

Case 2:06-cv-02053-GEB-EFB Document 18 Filed 12/12/06 Page 1 of 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

2

Defendants “HM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, f/k/a HIGHMARK LIFE INSURANCE

COMPANY, ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP, ASTRAZENECA LONG TERM

DISABILITY INSURANCE PLAN, and BROADSPIRE SERVICES, INC.” are

identified as participating in the JSR. (Id.) Thus, Defendants

Astrazeneca Administration Committee, Broadspire Integrated Disability

Management, and Broadspire Administrator Services, Inc. (“Nonparticipating Defendants”) have not participated in crafting the JSR,

yet Plaintiff fails to “explain[] why [he] was unable to obtain the

cooperation of the [Non-participating Defendants].” (September 15

Order at 2 n.1.) 

Plaintiff has also failed to provide sufficient information

about whether he will prosecute the Non-participating Defendants if

they fail to appear. It should be evident that Plaintiff was required

to provide this information under Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure. Plaintiff shall address these matters in a

supplemental status report due no later than noon on December 14,

2006. 

Plaintiff is warned that he and his attorneys could receive

an order to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for noncompliance with a federal rule and/or the September 15 Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 12, 2006

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-02053-GEB-EFB Document 18 Filed 12/12/06 Page 2 of 2