ORDER RE: PENDING CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Re: Dkt. Nos. 41, 42

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS, District Judge.

The Court has reviewed parties' cross-motions for summary judgment. (Dkt. Nos. 41, 42.) Based on the motions and their supporting filings, it appears as though both parties wish to proceed to a trial under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52. (See Dkt. No. 41 at 22 n.3; Dkt. No. 42 at 23-24 (describing burden of proof rather than summary judgment standard).) See Murphy v. Cal. Physicians' Service, Case No. 14-cv-2581-PJH, 2017 WL 1330636 at *20-21 (N.D. Ca. April 11, 2017); see also Kearney v. Standard Ins. Co., 175F.3d 1084, 1095 (9th Cir. 1999) (en banc); Muniz v. Amec Const. Management, Inc., 623 F.3d 1290, 1295-96 (9th Cir. 2010). However, defendant has not explicitly confirmed whether it agrees to proceed pursuant to Rule 52. (See Dkt. No. 42.) Accordingly, by no later than Thursday, August 30, 2018, defendant Sun Life Health Insurance Company shall file a notice confirming or objecting to the same.

Additionally, each party SHALL submit, by no later than Thursday, August 30, 2018, a statement of no more than five (5) pages addressing the following issues: (1) the manner in which the parties request that the Court proceed, either a Rule 52 trial on the administrative record1 or a Rule 52 trial on the record as well as live testimony and (2) parties' position on live testimony, including the standard by which the parties believe the Court should determine whether live testimony is necessary or appropriate.2 Moreover, the parties should be prepared to discuss these issues at the hearing currently scheduled for September 4, 2018.

IT IS SO ORDERED.