Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-00038/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-00038-12/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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVE NAGY,

Plaintiff,

v.

GROUP LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN 

FOR EMPLOYEES OF ORACLE 

AMERICA, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-00038-HSG 

ORDER REGARDING SELECTION OF 

AN INDEPENDENT EXPERT

In this action, Dave Nagy seeks long term disability benefits due to the symptoms of 

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (“CFS”), which he claims renders him totally disabled under the 

ERISA plan administered by the Defendants. Determining whether a claimant is disabled due to 

the symptoms of CFS is a task that has vexed many courts. This is because “[t]here is no blood 

test or other objective laboratory test for chronic fatigue syndrome.” Salomaa v. Honda Long 

Term Disability Plan, 642 F.3d 666, 676 (9th Cir. 2011). Instead, “[t]he standard diagnosis 

technique for [CFS] includes testing, comparing symptoms to a detailed Centers for Disease 

Control list of symptoms, excluding other possible disorders, and reviewing thoroughly the 

patient’s medical history.” Id. While there is no dispute that Nagy has been diagnosed with CFS, 

the administrative record in this case contains little to no expert opinion on whether the severity of 

Nagy’s CFS-related symptoms render him unable to work.

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority recognized by the Ninth Circuit in Muniz v. Amec 

Construction Management, Inc., 623 F.3d 1290, 1294 (9th Cir. 2010), the Court finds that the 

retention of an independent expert to evaluate Nagy’s functional capacity is warranted. The 

parties are directed to meet and confer regarding the potential experts and file a stipulation 

agreeing to an expert by no later than 21 days from the date of this order. If no agreement can be 

Case 4:14-cv-00038-HSG Document 79 Filed 09/14/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

reached, the parties must each file a brief of no more than five pages by the same deadline. Briefs

must propose an expert for the court to consider, disclose why the parties could not agree on a 

single expert, and explain why the party’s proposed expert should be selected.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

________________________

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

9/14/2015

Case 4:14-cv-00038-HSG Document 79 Filed 09/14/15 Page 2 of 2