Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01331/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01331-2/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 

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 

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 

JOSEPH P. BUSCH III, SBN 70340 

SALLY J. BERENS, SBN 218880 

1881 Page Mill Road 

Palo Alto, California 94304 

Telephone: (650) 849-5300 

Facsimile: (650) 849-5333 

Attorneys for Defendant 

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 

DISABILITY PLAN 

JESSE S. KAPLAN, SBN 103726 

5441 Fair Oaks Blvd., Ste. C-1 

Carmichael, CA 95608 

Telephone: (916) 488-3030 

Facsimile: (916) 489-9297 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

PATRICIA RIFFEY 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

PATRICIA RIFFEY, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 

DISABILITY PLAN, 

 Defendant. 

CASE NO. 2:05-CV-01331-FCD-JFM 

STIPULATION and ORDER RE : PAGE 

LIMITS ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

WHEREAS, the parties believe this case is best resolved on cross motions for summary 

judgment; 

WHEREAS, the parties believe that a briefing schedule different than that dictated by the 

local rules is necessary and convenient to the completion of briefing; 

WHEREAS, the parties do not believe that a "Statement of Undisputed Facts" as required by 

Local Rule 56-260(a) will be relevant or helpful to the Court in deciding the parties' cross motions 

for summary judgment, because the issue presented to the Court for adjudication does not present a 

question of whether there is a genuine dispute of material fact (Bendixen v. Standard Ins. Co., 185 

F.3d 939, 942 (9th Cir. 1999)); 

Case 2:05-cv-01331-FCD-JFM Document 24 Filed 01/17/07 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 

WHEREAS, the parties request additional briefing length beyond that allowed by the Court's 

Status (Pre-Trial Scheduling) Order dated July 7, 2006; 

THEREFORE, the parties stipulate, agree, and request the Court to order as follows: 

1. The parties' motions for summary judgment will be due on February 14, 2007, and 

will be noticed for the Court's hearing on March 16, 2006. The opening memoranda will not exceed 

twenty-five (25) pages in length. 

2. The parties' oppositions on summary judgment will be due on February 28, 2007, 

by 4:00 p.m. and will not exceed twenty-five (25) pages in length. 

3. The parties' reply briefing on summary judgment will be due on March 9, 2007, by 

4:00 p.m. and will not exceed fifteen (15) pages in length 

4. Neither party will file a "Statement of Undisputed Facts." 

5. The parties will serve all briefs by electronic means on the due date. 

DATED: January 12, 2007 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER, LLP 

By: /s/ Sally J. Berens . 

Sally J. Berens 

Attorneys for Defendant 

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY DISABILITY 

PLAN 

DATED: January 12, 2007 LAW OFFICES OF JESSE S. KAPLAN 

By: /s/ Jesse Kaplan (as authorized on 1/12/07) . 

Jesse Kaplan 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

PATRICIA RIFFEY 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: January 17, 2007 

Case 2:05-cv-01331-FCD-JFM Document 24 Filed 01/17/07 Page 2 of 2