Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cooper v. Aetna Health Inc.

September 10, 2008

MICHELLE COOPER, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS
v.
AETNA HEALTH INC., PA CORP., ET AL. DEFENDANTS



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Patty Shwartz, United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER ON INFORMAL APPLICATION & SECOND AMENDED PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

THIS MATTER having come before the Court by way of letter dated September 8, 2008, regarding the joint request to extend by 120 days the deadlines associated with the class certification discovery and motion practice because time is needed to complete discovery relevant to these issues, including a review of the Ingenix data;

and while the parties have presented good cause to extend the deadlines associated with class certification matters, such does not exist as it relates to the other deadlines;

and the Court declining to adopt the proposal that would contemplate surreply briefs in connection with the class certification motions as it is more efficient to require all class certification discovery to be completed before the motions are filed;

and this approach ensuring that all parties are operating from the same factual record when briefing and opposing the motion;

and the Court therefore extending the deadlines associated with class certification motion practice selected deadlines that commence after class certification discovery is completed;

and the parties all seeking corresponding changes in the merits discovery schedule, which under the parties' proposal would result in adjournment of the Final Pretrial Conference from November 17, 2009 to a date after February 5, 2010;

and the Court not being satisfied that good cause exists to extend those deadlines simply because the class certification dates are being extended and given the likely overlap between the merits and class discovery;

IT IS THEREFORE on this 10th day of September, 2008,

ORDERED THAT:

1. The request to bifurcate class and merits discovery is denied but that all discovery shall be produced on a rolling basis and priority shall be given to discovery needed for class action motion practice;

2. The request to extend the deadlines associated with class discovery and class certification motion practice is granted but the request to extend any other deadline is denied;

3. No later than September 15, 2008 at 2:00 p.m., the parties shall submit a proposed electronic discovery protocol;

4. If the parties have disagreement about any provision of the proposed orders referred to in Paragraph 3, then they shall submit one proposed order that embodies the competing provisions in different fonts and the parties shall include a footnote that explains why the party believes its version should be adopted instead of the adversary's proposal;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT:

I. COURT DATES

1. There shall be a telephone status conference before the Undersigned on the dates and to be initiated ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.