IN lilellf UNI IIEED SI/\iliIY£S DIS`l`RlL`"l <_`()IIR.'I
FOR SIIIIY DIS`l"I`
l’luinti|l`
Civil Action No ; ()4—l+I7()
<_`<)Nâ€I`INIEN'I`AI_ (QASLIAL IY
(`(i)l`vIP/\NY
Delentltint
RULE I6 SCl·IEI)ULIN(§ ORDER
lihe panties having sutislictl their obligutiorrs trnrler lied R Cixi. P 20(I`).
Il IS ORDERED `Il~iAI`:
I Pre-I)iscovei·y Disclosures. On or zrhout September I2. 2005. Delendant has
previously []I“OClLlCC(.l . "Undei Seal". u complete copy ofthe trc.Iministrutive claim lile to the X
Pluintilli
2. Joinder of thc other Parties
PlnintiI"I‘: None
Delenclamt: None
3. Settlement Cont`crcuce. Pursuzrnt to 28 U SC`. §636. this matter is relerrecl to
I\/lugistrrate Judge Thynge For the purpose of exploring the possibility ol at settlement. It the
panties agree that they would benelit from 21 settlement conference. the parties shall contact
I\/lagistrzite Judge Thynge to schedule at settlement conlerence so us to he completed no later than
the Pretrictl Conference or at clzrte ordered by the Court.
Case 1:04-cv-01470-JJF Document 32 Filed 08/22/2006 Page 2 cf 4
l)ef`endant seeks rr lvlediatinnfSetllenient (`nnlerence befirre Magistrate fudge
l il} nge
4. Discovery
Plaintiff is entitled tn discovery
Defendant believes that neither party is entitled tn discm er) linsiba v. Merci; &
384 li Rd 58. 67 n.5 (Bd (`ir 2004) (noting that the record Ikrr arbitrary amd capricious review
uf l-*RlS.¢\ benefits denial is the recrrrd made belirre the plan administrator. and crmnnt be i
strpplernental during litigation); l\/litclieil v. liastnrrrn litrdtilt Ln. l I3 l Bd 433. 44f) (Bd Cir D
W97) (hnlding that under the arbitrary and capricious standard nf rcx ierv. the "xvh0le" reenrrl
consists nl that evidence that was befbie the adrnirristratcr when hc made the tleeisirm being
reviewed); Iireccia cx ref. Estate nfilirccle v. Cnncetg. 379 l` Supp Id 620. 626 (D. Del 2004)
(finding that under bntlr a standard and heightened arbitrary and capr ieinrrs review nl" a denial nf
benefits under an emplayer-sponsored medical berefits plan. a court is limited under ERISA to
the evidence that as is before the plan aclrninistr·at0r· where it made the decision being reviewed);
Russell v. Patil Revere Life ins. Cn. 148 F. Supp jid 392. 405 (D Del. 200l) (stating that the
cerrrrt’s review is limited tc the recnrd that was befbre the administrators under the arbitrary and
capricious standard nl review). i
5 Discovery Disputes
l’laintil’f°. Net at this paint.
Delendant: Net Applicable
6 Amendment of the Plcatlings
Plaintiffi. No amendment ta pleadings are anticipated
Case 1:04-cv-01470-JJF Document 32 Filed 08/22/2006 Page 3 of 4
Delcndant docs not scclt to amend rlcadings I
7 Case Dispositivc Nlotiorrs
Plaintill" None anticipated
Delcndant: the
8 Applications hy Motion. C
ta) Any ttpplications to the (fort it shall he hy written motion tiled with the
tlcrlt ol thc Court in compliance with the li`edertrl Rules ol ('ivil l’ro<:cdurc and the l oezrl Rules
ol (Tixil l’r;tcticc tor thc llnited States Distrrirzt Court lor the tlistrict ol lilelaixarc t.r\mcnded
l?itlectix~·c lanuary l. l‘J‘J5) Any non-dispositive motion shall contain thc statement required hy
D. Del LR. 7.1 .l. l3riet`s shall he limited to no more than ten { ttl) pages. Parties may tile i
stipulated and unopposed Orders with the Clerk ot` the Court lor the Courts review and signing
the Court will not consider applications and requests subrnitted by letter or in a form other than _
a motion
(ly) No facsimile transmissions will he accepted.
(c) No telephone calls shall be made to Chambers.
(d) Any party with a true emergency matter requiring the assistance ofthe _
Court shall e-mail Chambers at;[email protected] The email shall provide a short
statement describing the emergency.
0 Pretrial Conference and Trial. Alter reviewing the parties` Proposed
Scheduling Order. the Court will schedule a Pretrirtl Contcrenrze. The Court will determine
whether the trial date should be scheduled when the Scheduling Order is entered or at the Pretrial ‘
Conference. It scheduling of the trial date is deferred until the Pretrial Conlierenee, the parties
Case 1:04-cv-01470-JJF Document 32 Filed 08/22/2006 Page 4 0f 4
nntl unnnsel slmll nnticipzttc nntl ptcnauu lb: at ttiul in hc licltl within sixty (Oli) in ninety will tlnys
nl thc Pictttul (,`tll`ll>Cl\.`llCC
l)i\»l·l¥ lVlNl`l‘}ED S/lA IES DiS l`Rl(`>l` .ll_ll)C`il€
ff} / ',`t— t___;_':%/ i.......1____
.l,. .,> /# ( t-.-_...._....?.+...,_.....
l<â€i')llQ ` MC`l)<)N.·*\l.,D. l:S(_)ltllRl? (#/2340) ‘
.~\ttn’111c§qf int Platintill
/ l''A / _\\
< » )
t \ . e
\¤<') ` A -)t_
US/· A ltlS :SQUlRE (#3752)
A nine) lin Dc tlnnt
Hcmixoll l>t>t
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms