8143006v1 6/6/2013 1:14 PM 8143006v1 6/6/2013 1:14 PM 8143006v1 6/6/2013 1:14 PM 8143006v1 6/6/2013 1:14 PM 8143006v1 6/6/2013 1:14 PM PLAINTIFFS’ [PROPOSED] FIFTH AMENDED PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

Case No. CV 10-9198 JVS (RNBx)

KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP

101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2300

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111

8089739v2 4/46/2011 32:1815 PM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOYCE WALKER, KIM BRUCE HOWLETT, and MURIEL SPOONER, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE SOUTHWEST, a Texas corporation,

Defendant.

CLASS ACTION

CASE NO.: CV 10-9198 JVS (RNBx)

Formerly Case No.: 3:10-cv -04852 JSW from Northern District of CA

PLAINTIFFS’ [PROPOSED] FIFTH AMENDED PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

Case 2:10-cv-09198-JVS-RNB Document 452-3 Filed 06/06/13 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:20111

PLAINTIFFS’ [PROPOSED] FIFTH AMENDED PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

Case No. CV 10-9198 JVS (RNBx)

KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP

101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2300

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111

Having reviewed the parties’ Joint Stipulation Regarding Fifth Amended

Pretrial Scheduling Order, and good cause appearing therefore, the Court issues the

following Order:

1. All of the dates in the Fourth Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order

shall be modified as set forth below. This amended schedule generally preserves

the deadlines and time periods between the scheduling events as set forth in the

Fourth Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order, but extends the scheduled dates to

accommodate the time period for finalizing and providing notice to the class after

the Ninth Circuit rules on Plaintiffs’ Rule 23(f) petition. The scheduling of the

trial date below is provisional only, and may need to be reset depending on the

Court’s calendar.

2. The deadlines set forth in the Court’s May 28, 2013 Order Regarding

Class Notice (Dkt. 446) are vacated, and the parties’ meet and confer regarding

class notice and submission to the Court of a joint status report setting forth a

proposed class notice are deferred until resolution of Plaintiffs’ Rule 23(f)

petition.1 In the event that the Ninth Circuit denies Plaintiffs’ Rule 23(f) petition,

the parties shall, beginning no later than 15 days from the entry of an order by the

Ninth Circuit denying Plaintiffs’ Rule 23(f) petition, meet and confer regarding an

appropriate class notice. Within 30 days of the entry of an order by the Ninth

Circuit denying Plaintiffs’ Rule 23(f) petition, the parties shall file a joint status

report setting forth an appropriate notice. In accordance with the Court’s May 28,

1 Although Plaintiffs fully intend to file a Rule 23(f) petition on or before June 12, 2013, in the event that Plaintiffs fail to file such a petition, the deadlines set forth in the Court’s May 28, 2013 Order Regarding Class Notice (Dkt. 446) shall begin to run on June 13, 2013 (the first date following the time period in which Plaintiffs may file a petition pursuant to Rule 23(f)). Accordingly, if Plaintiffs do not file a Rule 23(f) petition, beginning no later than 15 days from June 13, 2013, the parties shall meet and confer regarding an appropriate class notice. Within 30 days of June 13, 2013, the parties shall file a joint status report setting forth an appropriate notice. In accordance with the Court’s May 28, 2013 Order, where the parties are unable to agree upon any portion of the class notice, they shall each set forth their alternative proposals in the same document.

Case 2:10-cv-09198-JVS-RNB Document 452-3 Filed 06/06/13 Page 2 of 5 Page ID #:20112

PLAINTIFFS’ [PROPOSED] FIFTH AMENDED PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

Case No. CV 10-9198 JVS (RNBx)

KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP

101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2300

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111

2013 Order, where the parties are unable to agree upon any portion of the class

notice, they shall each set forth their alternative proposals in the same document.

In the event that the Ninth Circuit grants Plaintiffs’ Rule 23(f) petition, all

deadlines in this Order shall be vacated, and the parties shall meet and confer

regarding a further amended scheduling order to accommodate the appeal to the

Ninth Circuit.

3. All discovery, including depositions, will be stayed and deferred until

the Ninth Circuit rules on Plaintiffs’ Rule 23(f) petition. Notwithstanding this stay

of discovery, while Plaintiffs’ Rule 23(f) petition is pending, either party may

bring a joint stipulation before the Magistrate Judge to resolve any discovery

dispute that is currently outstanding or that may arise while Plaintiffs’ Rule 23(f)

petition is pending.

4. The last date for hearing motions will be 7 days after the close of the

opt-out period as provided in the class notice approved by the Court. Except as

otherwise set forth below, all motions shall be served and filed no later than four

weeks (28 days) before the last date for hearing motions.

5. With respect to any motion for summary judgment that may be filed,

the parties will meet and confer on a briefing schedule, but the time between the

filing of any summary judgment motion and the hearing date shall be no less than

60 days.

6. The trial date will be seven weeks (49 days) after the last date for

hearing motions, as set forth in Paragraph 4 above. The pretrial conference will

take place 10 days before the amended trial date, in accordance with the Fourth

Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order.

7. Pursuant to the Trial Order and in compliance with Local Rule 6, all

motions in limine shall be filed and served no later than four weeks (28 days) prior

to the amended pretrial conference date.

8. Pursuant to and in compliance with Local Rule 16, the parties’ Pretrial

Case 2:10-cv-09198-JVS-RNB Document 452-3 Filed 06/06/13 Page 3 of 5 Page ID #:20113

PLAINTIFFS’ [PROPOSED] FIFTH AMENDED PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

Case No. CV 10-9198 JVS (RNBx)

KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP

101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2300

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111

Conference Order shall be lodged no later than 11 days before the amended pretrial

conference date.

9. Pursuant to and in compliance with Local Rule 16, all Memoranda of

Contentions of Fact and Law, Exhibit Lists, and Witness Lists shall be submitted

no later than three weeks (21 days) prior to the amended pretrial conference date.

10. Non-expert fact discovery shall remain open until eleven weeks (77

days) before the amended trial date. Pursuant to the Trial Order, all depositions

shall commence no later than 5 working days before the close of non-expert fact

discovery.

11. The deadline for written discovery passed on December 4, 2012, and

is not extended or re-opened by this stipulation. Notwithstanding this deadline,

either party may propound additional written discovery pursuant to any Order by

the Court permitting such additional written discovery upon good cause shown.

Nothing in this Order shall be interpreted as a waiver of a propounding party’s

right to seek supplementation of the responding party’s responses to any previously

propounded written discovery requests as required by the Federal Rules, by Court

Order, or by any other applicable rule.

12. Expert discovery will remain open until five weeks before the

amended trial date. The parties shall submit their expert disclosures no later than

eight weeks (56 days) prior to the amended close of expert discovery, any rebuttal

expert disclosures no later than five weeks (35 days) prior to the amended close of

expert discovery, and any reply expert disclosures no later than two weeks (14

days) prior to the amended close of expert discovery. All expert depositions shall

commence no later than the date for the amended close of expert discovery.

13. The parties will participate in a non-judicial dispute resolution

proceeding, Settlement Procedure Number 3 under Local Rule 16-15.4. The last

date for completion of this Settlement Procedure shall be no later than the amended

close of non-expert fact discovery.

Case 2:10-cv-09198-JVS-RNB Document 452-3 Filed 06/06/13 Page 4 of 5 Page ID #:20114

PLAINTIFFS’ [PROPOSED] FIFTH AMENDED PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

Case No. CV 10-9198 JVS (RNBx)

KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP

101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2300

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111

14. The timing and procedures for proposed jury instructions, special

verdicts and voir dire questions are set forth at Docket No. 61, pp. 5-6.

15. The parties may seek modification of this Order at any time and for

good cause shown.

16. The production end date is not modified by entry of this Order and

shall remain as 60 days prior to the close of non-expert fact discovery, as set by

Magistrate Judge Block in his December 14, 2012 Minute Order, Docket No. 365.

This Order is without prejudice to LSW’s right to seek modification before

Magistrate Judge Block of the production end date.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: ______________________

Honorable James V. Selna United States District Judge

Case 2:10-cv-09198-JVS-RNB Document 452-3 Filed 06/06/13 Page 5 of 5 Page ID #:20115