Goh v. The Dept. of Veterans Affairs, et al.

Filing 12

STIPULATION and ORDER GRANTING THIRD EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT. Plaintiff shall file an Amended Complaint within thirty (30) days of this Order, by August 18, 2014; and Defendants shall file an Answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint by September 1, 2014, or fourteen (14) days from the date of the filing of the Amended Complaint, whichever is sooner, pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3). Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 7/18/2014. (Timken, A)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

ROBERT GOH, M.D.,

9
10
11
12
13

Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NO. 1:14-cv-00315-LJO-SKO
STIPULATION AND ORDER
GRANTING THIRD EXTENSION OF
TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
VETERANS AFFAIRS and THE UNITED
STATES AIR FORCE.
Defendants

14
15

Plaintiff served his Complaint in this matter on April 9, 2014. Pursuant to Federal Rule of

16

Civil Procedure 4(i), the United States’ responsive pleading was originally due on June 9, 2014.

17

Pursuant to Local Rule 144(a), the parties stipulated and agreed that Defendant would have an

18

extension of 21 days, up to and including June 30, 2014, within which to respond to Plaintiff’s

19

Complaint [Dkt. No. 1], for purposes of pursuing settlement options. The Court granted that request,

20

and moved the scheduling conference to August 26, 2014, in that same order. [Dkt. No. 8.] Although

21

settlement efforts were unsuccessful, Plaintiff and Defendants identified the potential to narrow the

22

claims and defenses in the case, and Plaintiff was considering an amendment or his Complaint.

23

Thereafter, in order to permit Plaintiff time to fully consider his position and determine

24

whether to file an amended complaint, the parties agreed to a further 14-day extension for

25

Defendants’ response to Plaintiff’s Complaint, from June 30, 2014, to July 14, 2014. That request

26

was granted on July 2, 2014. [Dkt. No. 10.].

27
28
29
30

The parties have again met and conferred, and Plaintiff intends to file an Amended
Complaint based on that meet and confer. Thus, to avoid wasting the Court’s and the parties’
1

1

resources on a responsive pleading to what will soon be a superseded complaint, the parties hereby

2

stipulate that the United States’ response to the amended Complaint would be due 14 days after it is

3

filed. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3).

4

Respectfully submitted,

5

DATED: July 17, 2014
By

6
7
8

DATED: July 17, 2014

9

__

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
By:

10

/s/ Nicholas Jurkowitz
Nicholas Jurkowitz
Attorney for Plaintiff

11

/s/ Gregory T. Broderick
GREGORY T. BRODERICK
Assistant United States Attorney

12

ORDER

13

Good cause appearing and in the interest of preserving the resources of the Court and the

14

parties, the parties’ request to extend the time for Defendants to file an Answer is GRANTED.

15

However, the parties have not indicated by when Plaintiff will file an Amended Complaint, and the

16

case cannot remain pending indefinitely. See In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Products Liab.

17

Litig., 460 F.3d 1217, 1227 (9th Cir. 2006) (District courts have inherent power to control their

18

dockets.).

19

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

20

(1) Plaintiff shall file an Amended Complaint within thirty (30) days of this Order, by
August 18, 2014; and

21
22

(2) Defendants shall file an Answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint

23

by September 1, 2014, or fourteen (14) days from the date of the filing of the Amended

24

Complaint, whichever is sooner, pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3).

25
26
27

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

July 18, 2014

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

28
29
30

2