Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-01936/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-01936-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability

---

-1- 

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

Robert S. Arns, State Bar No. 65071 

Morgan C. Smith, State Bar No. 168146 

THE ARNS LAW FIRM 

A Professional Corporation 

515 Folsom Street, 3rd Floor 

San Francisco, California 94105 

Phone: (415) 495-7800 

Fax: (415) 495-7888 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

ROBERT CLICK AND MARIE CLICK 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ROBERT CLICK and MARIE CLICK, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

DORMAN LONG TECHNOLOGY, 

LIMITED et al., 

 Defendants. 

USDC Case No: C 06 1936 PJH 

FURTHER STIPULATION AND 

PROPOSED ORDER EXTENDING 

TIME TO RESPOND TO 

UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR 

DAMAGES, AND CONTINUING 

CASE MANAGEMENT 

CONFERENCE AND RELATED 

DATES AND REQUESTING 

IMMEDIATE ASSIGNMENT TO A 

JUDGE MAGISTRATE FOR 

MEDIATION 

Case 4:06-cv-01936-PJH Document 44 Filed 12/15/06 Page 1 of 5
-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

This stipulation is made by and between plaintiffs Robert Click and Marie Click 

(“plaintiffs”) and defendant Dorman Long Technology Limited (“DLT”), by and 

through their respective attorneys of record, The Arns Law Firm and Thelen Reid & 

Priest, LLP. 

RECITALS 

The stipulation is based on the following facts: 

 1. DLT was served with plaintiffs’ Unverified Complaint for Damages and 

Demand for Jury Trial (“the Complaint”) on or about April 27, 2006. 

 2. At the time DLT was served with the Complaint, DLT was already a party 

defendant to plaintiffs’ first complaint, Case No. 05-03037 PJH. 

 3. The Court granted DLT’s motion to dismiss on September 6, 2006, 

finding that the first complaint, Case No. 05-03037 PJH, was duplicative of the 

Complaint in the subject action. 

 4. The parties previously stipulated that DLT had until December 18, 2006 to 

answer the Complaint in the subject action. 

 5. The parties agree that DLT is granted a further extension up to and 

including January 25th, 2007 to answer the Complaint in the subject action. 

 6. This case was originally mediated with Michael Traynor as the assigned 

mediator on September 19, 2006. This mediation was successful in that a proposed 

settlement was offered by defendant DLT that plaintiff would be willing to accept. 

7. However, since plaintiff is covered under the Longhore and Harbor 

Workers Act, the Longshore carrier must approve any third party settlement in writing 

before plaintiff is allowed to settle the case. (See 33. U.S.C. §935.) Therefore, plaintiff 

cannot fully settle the case without the permission and agreement of this carrier, which 

is National Union Fire Insurance Company, represented by the law offices of 

ADELSON, TESTAN, BRUNDO & POPALARDO. 

Case 4:06-cv-01936-PJH Document 44 Filed 12/15/06 Page 2 of 5
-3- 

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

 8. As soon as the proposed settlement was made by defendant DLT, counsel 

for plaintiff immediately contacted Michael Jonescu at the ADELSON office seeking 

resolution of the lien held by National Union Fire Insurance Company. Counsel for 

plaintiff called this office a number of times to follow up, and obtained no response. 

Counsel for plaintiff was then was told that Mr. Jonsescu was no longer with the firm 

and was told to speak to Mr. John Rutan, who was taking over the file but did not know 

anything about the case. Upon further calls to the office, counsel for plaintiff was told 

that Mr. Davil Vasquez was handling the matter. Mr. Vasquez has been helpful in 

responding to the issue, but after a month, appears no closer to obtaining settlement 

authority from his carrier than the others. 

 9. Counsel for plaintiff believes the only way to finish the settlement of this 

case is to have the court assign this matter to a magistrate judge for mediation as soon as 

possible. The parties stipulate that defendant DLT is not required to have any 

representative of the company present for the mediation other than their attorney of 

record, as the issue is between plaintiff and the Longshore/workers compensation 

carrier. 

 7. This case currently has a case management conference set for December 

21, 2006 at 2:30 p.m. In light of the further extension DLT has to answer the 

Complaint, it is stipulated that the case management conference is continued to January 

25th at 2:30 p.m. 

Case 4:06-cv-01936-PJH Document 44 Filed 12/15/06 Page 3 of 5
-4- 

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

 9. The joint case management conference statement shall be due on January 

16th, 2007. 

 I hereby attest that I have on file all holograph signatures for any signatures 

indicated by a “conformed” signature (/S/) within this e-filed document. 

Dated: December 14, 2006 

THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP 

By /s/ Lynn R. Fiorentino 

 Paul V. Lankford 

 Lynn R. Fiorentino 

Attorneys for Defendant 

DORMAN LONG TECHNOLOGY 

LIMITED 

Dated: December 14, 2006 

THE ARNS LAW FIRM 

By /s/ Morgan C. Smith 

 Morgan C. Smith 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

ROBERT CLICK and MARIE CLICK 

Case 4:06-cv-01936-PJH Document 44 Filed 12/15/06 Page 4 of 5
-5- 

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

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED as follows: 

1. The parties to this action are hereby ordered to mediation before a court 

designated Magistrate Judge at the earliest available date. The court further orders that a 

representative of National Union Fire Insurance Company with the authority to settle its 

lien, and their counsel ADELSON, TESTAN, BRUNDO & POPALARDO, be present 

at the mediation, or face its lien being ordered void by a ruling of this court. 

2. A company representative for defendant DLT need not be present at the 

mediation in light of the pending settlement offer. However, counsel for DLT shall be 

present to confirm any settlement on the record. 

3. The case management conference scheduled for December 21, 2006 shall 

be continued until January 25th at 2:30 p.m. 

 4. The joint case management conference statement shall be due on January 

16th, 2007. 

 5. Defendant DLT shall have an extension of time to answer to the complaint 

through January 25th, 2007. 

Dated: ________________________ 

________________________________ 

The Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton 

United States District Judge 

12/15/06

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton

Case 4:06-cv-01936-PJH Document 44 Filed 12/15/06 Page 5 of 5