Operating Engineers' Pension Trust Fund et al v. Clarks Welding And Machine et al, No. 3:2009cv00044 - Document 110 (N.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER granting leave for Plaintiffs to file a Statement of Recent Decision. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 1/7/10. (tdm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/7/2010)

Download PDF

1 RICHARD C. JOHNSON (SBN 40881) SHAAMINI A. BABU (SBN 230704) 2 SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2110 3 San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 882-7900 4 (415) 882-9287 Facsimile djohnson@sjlawcorp.com 5 sbabu@sjlawcorp.com 6 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 OPERATING ENGINEERS PENSION TRUST FUND; GIL CROSTHWAITE and 10 RUSS BURNS, as Trustees, 11 12 Case No.: C09-0044 SC PLAINTIFF REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; DECLARATION OF SHAAMINI A. BABU IN SUPPORT THEREOF; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Plaintiffs, vs. CLARKS WELDING AND MACHINE, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 [Local Rule 7-3(d)] 15 16 I, Shaamini A. Babu, declare that I have personal knowledge of the following facts and if called as 17 a witness I could testify competently thereto: 1. 18 I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of California. I am an 19 associate at Saltzman & Johnson Law Corporation, attorneys for Plaintiffs herein. 2. 20 On October 30, 2009, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Summary Judgment in this 21 action. Docket No. 50. 3. 22 Defendants filed their Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment on 23 November 13, 2009. Docket No. 77. 4. Thereafter, Plaintiffs filed their Reply Brief on November 19, 2009. Docket No. 5. 24 On November 30, 2009, this Court vacated the hearing on the Motion for Summary 25 78. 26 27 Judgment and stated it would be deciding said motion on the papers. Docket No. 90. 28 1 P:\CLIENTS\OE3PP\Cases\Clarks Welding\MSJ\Request to File Stmt of Recent Decision 010510.doc REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION Case No.: C09-0044 SC 1 6. Pursuant to the Court s November 30th Order, Defendants filed a Sur-Reply on 2 December 3, 2009. Docket No. 91. 3 7. Neither the Defendants nor the Plaintiffs have cited the following relevant decision 4 that was issued on November 3, 2009, in any papers relating to the Motion for Summary 5 Judgment: Amalgamated Lithographers of America Lithographic Industry Pension Plan v. UNZ & 6 So. Incorp., 2009 U.S. Dist. Lexis 108324 at *33-36 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 3, 2009) (holding that if 7 laches is claimed as a defenses to a claim for withdrawal liability, the issue must be arbitrated.) 8 8. The Motion for Summary Judgment is still under submission with the Court. On 9 December 11, 2009, the Court issued an order requesting supplement briefs relating to the impact 10 of Tracy Mainguy s continued deposition on said motion. Docket No. 105. Pursuant to said order, 11 Defendants supplement brief is due on January 15, 2010, and Plaintiffs supplement brief is due on 12 January 20, 2010. 13 9. 14 17 Supplementary Material. Before the noticed hearing date, counsel may bring to the Court s attention a relevant judicial opinion published after the date the opposition or reply was filed by serving and filing a Statement of Recent Decision, containing a citation to and providing a copy of the new opinion without argument. Otherwise, once a reply is filed, no additional memoranda, papers or letters may be filed without prior Court approval. 18 10. 15 16 19 20 This Court s Civil Local Rules 7-3(d) provides: The decision in UNZ & So. Incorp. was issued and filed ten (10) days before Defendants Opposition was filed and sixteen (16) days before Plaintiffs Reply Brief was filed. Although it was issued and filed on November 3, 2009, it was not available online at 21 22 www.lexisnexis.com until November 21, 2009. The decision has not yet been published in an 23 official or unofficial reporter. It was recently brought to the attention of Plaintiffs counsel while 24 conducting research online at www.lexisnexis.com, the online research system utilized by 25 Plaintiffs counsel. Thus, Plaintiffs seek leave of Court to file a Statement of Recent Decision in 26 accordance with Local Rule 7-3(d). 27 28 2 P:\CLIENTS\OE3PP\Cases\Clarks Welding\MSJ\Request to File Stmt of Recent Decision 010510.doc REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION Case No.: C09-0044 SC 11. 1 Although the decision was not issued by a court in this jurisdiction, Plaintiffs 2 counsel seek leave to file a Statement of Recent Decision in accordance with Local Rule 7-3(d) 3 since the decision is relevant to the Motion for Summary Judgment and thus, may be persuasive to 4 this Court when it considers and rules on the pending Motion for Summary Judgment. 12. 5 Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs respectfully request the Court to grant leave for 6 Plaintiffs to file a Statement of Recent Decision pursuant to Local Rule 7-3(d) within three (3) 7 days from the date of the Court s order. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this 8 9 Declaration was executed upon this 5th day of January, 2010, at San Francisco, California. 10 Dated: January 5, 2010 SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION 11 12 By: ___________/s/____________________ Shaamini A. Babu Attorneys for Plaintiffs 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 16 This Court hereby grants leave under Local Rule 7-3(d) for Plaintiffs to file a Statement of 17 Recent Decision within three (3) days from the date of this Order. S onti 22 LI A H ER FO amuel C Judge S RT 21 R NIA ERED __________________________________ O ORD IT IS S Honorable Samuel Conti NO 20 UNIT ED 19 Date: _________________________ January 7, 2010 S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O 18 N F D IS T IC T O R C 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 P:\CLIENTS\OE3PP\Cases\Clarks Welding\MSJ\Request to File Stmt of Recent Decision 010510.doc REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION Case No.: C09-0044 SC 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 I, the undersigned, declare: I am a citizen of the United States and am employed in the County of San Francisco, State 3 4 of California. I am over the age of eighteen and not a party to this action. My business address is 5 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2110, San Francisco, California 94104. On January 5, 2010, I served the following document(s): 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 PLAINTIFF REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; DECLARATION OF SHAAMINI A. BABU IN SUPPORT THEREOF; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER on the interested parties in said action by First Class U.S. Mail, by placing a true and exact copy of each document in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in a United States Post Office box in San Francisco, California, addressed as follows: /// Cassandra M. Ferrannini DOWNEY BRAND LLP 621 Capitol Mall, 18th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 16 17 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this th 18 declaration was executed on this 5 day of January, 2010, at San Francisco, California. 19 20 _________________________________ Catherine Jemera 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 P:\CLIENTS\OE3PP\Cases\Clarks Welding\MSJ\Request to File Stmt of Recent Decision 010510.doc REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION Case No.: C09-0044 SC

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.