DeMarco v. Life Insurance Company of North America ( 2019 )

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Leslie DeMarco, No. CV-19-02385-PHX-DWL 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Life Insurance Company of North America, 13 Defendant. 14 15 This is an ERISA case. In their Rule 26(f) report, the parties noted that they disagree 16 over whether Plaintiff is entitled to discovery, and if so, what the scope of that discovery 17 should be. (Doc. 18 at 7-8.) Specifically, Plaintiff stated that she believes “de novo review” 18 applies in this case and that she is therefore “entitled to engage in discovery consistent with 19 Opeta v. Northwest Airlines Pension Plan, 484 F.3d 1211 (9th Cir. 2007),” which will 20 likely include “no more than 4 depositions.” (Id. at 7.) Meanwhile, Defendant stated that 21 “[b]ecause the plan confers discretion on LINA, the abuse of discretion standard applies. 22 While some discovery into the dual-role conflict (or structural conflict) may be appropriate, 23 the discovery must be narrowly-tailored to the facts of the specific case. Any conflict 24 discovery can typically be accomplished through written discovery, without the need for 25 depositions. LINA asks the Court to place a modest limit on written discovery and, if any 26 depositions are permitted, to limit the number and amount of time permitted.” (Id.) 27 Based on these representations, the Court issued a scheduling order that, among 28 other things, set a deadline for discovery-related briefing. (Doc. 20 at 2.) The relevant 1 paragraph of the scheduling order provides that “[i]f there is a dispute as to the need for 2 and/or scope of discovery, the deadline for Plaintiff(s) to submit a brief concerning its 3 position shall be September 17, 2019. This brief may be no longer than seven pages long, 4 must identify—with specificity—any interrogatories, document requests, requests for 5 admission, and/or depositions that Plaintiff(s) would like to pursue, and must set forth any 6 legal authority supporting Plaintiff(s)’ position. The deadline for Defendant(s) to file a 7 response, which may not exceed seven pages in length, shall be October 17, 2019. No 8 replies may be filed.” (Id.) 9 Now pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulated motion to vacate these 10 deadlines. (Doc. 23.) In a nutshell, the parties argue that because they “disagree regarding 11 the standard of review for the Court to apply in this matter, i.e. de novo or discretionary,” 12 they “believe the most efficient manner in which to litigate the case is for the standard of 13 review issue to be briefed first with the Court deciding the issue. The standard of review 14 will then inform the parties’ briefing regarding whether discovery is permitted, and if so, 15 the scope of discovery the Court may allow.” (Id. at 2.) 16 This request will be denied. Although the scope of discovery may depend on the 17 applicable standard of review, there’s no reason why the parties can’t brief both of these 18 interrelated issues in the single set of briefs. Bifurcating the briefing schedule in the 19 manner suggested by the parties—i.e., the parties first brief the standard-of-review issue, 20 then the Court reads the briefs and issues an order on that issue, then the parties submit 21 another set of briefs addressing the scope of discovery, and then the Court issues another 22 order after reading another set of briefs—would not promote judicial economy and would 23 unnecessarily slow down the resolution of this case. 24 The Court will, however, increase the page limits set forth in the scheduling order. 25 This change should give the parties the ability to address all of the relevant issues. 26 … 27 … 28 … 1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ stipulated motion for an expedited 2|| order to vacate the current briefing schedule (Doc. 23) is denied. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the page limits set forth in paragraph four of 4|| the scheduling order (Doc. 20) are modified such that each party’s brief regarding 5 || discovery may not exceed 11 pages. 6 Dated this 9th day of September, 2019. 7 8 Ly 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3-