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

Filing 31

SCHEDULING ORDER: Plaintiff shall file any amendment to any pleadings by no later than 12/9/2014. Parties shall meet and confer regarding the contents of the Adminstrative Record prior to lodging it with the Court, and will eliminate all disputes as to the contents of the record by no later than 12/23/2014. Defendants shall produce to Plaintiff and lodge with the Court the final Adminstrative Record by no later than 12/23/2014. Filing of Plaintiff's opening brief: 2/6/2015; Filing of Defe ndant's response brief: 3/10/2015; Filing of Plaintiff's reply brief: 3/24/2015. Hearing set for 4/7/2015, at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 12/10/2014. (Timken, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

ROBERT GOH, M.D.,
Plaintiff,

10

Case No. 1:14-cv-00315-LJO-SKO
SCHEDULING ORDER

v.

11
12
13
14
15

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE;
DEBORAH LEE JAMES, Secretary,
Defendants.
_____________________________________/

16
17

The Court conducted a telephonic scheduling conference on December 9, 2014. Counsel

18 Alexandra De Rivera, Esq., appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. Counsel Gregory Broderick, Esq.,
19 appeared on behalf of Defendants. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b), this Court sets a schedule for
20 this action.
21 1.

Current Status of Consent to the Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction

22

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the parties have not consented to conduct all further

23 proceedings in this case, including trial, before the Honorable Sheila K. Oberto, U.S. Magistrate
24 Judge.
25 2.

Scheduling Deadlines

26

This case involves judicial review of a final agency determination under the Administrative

27 Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706. With respect to the administrative records and dispositive
28 motions, the parties have agreed to the following dates and deadlines:

1
2

Event

Date/Deadline

3 Plaintiff shall file any amendment to any pleadings
4 Parties shall meet and confer regarding the contents of
the Administrative Record prior to lodging it with the
5 Court, and will eliminate all disputes as to the contents
of the record
6
Defendants shall produce to Plaintiff and lodge with the
7
Court the final Administrative Record.
8
Filing of Plaintiff’s opening brief
9
Filing of Defendant’s response brief
10
Filing of Plaintiff’s reply brief
11
Hearing before U.S. District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill,
12
Courtroom 4
13

December 9, 2014
December 23, 2014

December 23, 2014
February 6, 2015
March 10, 2015
March 24, 2015
April 7, 2015

14 3.

Lodging and Serving the Administrative Record

15

The parties have agreed that the administrative record shall be limited to documents

16 relevant to Plaintiff's claim that the investigation and review of his medical services applied the
17 wrong standards in determining whether to renew his hospital privileges, and that the Air Force
18 acted arbitrarily and capriciously in adopting the review panel’s recommendation to restrict his
19 privileges and to engage in a more comprehensive review of his record-keeping for a time.
20

Defendants shall lodge one copy of the electronic version of the administrative record with

21 the Clerk of the Court, and provide one courtesy copy to Judge O’Neill’s chambers.
22 4.

Statement of Disputed Facts

23

The parties do not set forth any contested facts at this time, but agree that the record speaks

24 for itself and that they may have differing interpretations of the record once it is lodged.
25 5.

Compliance with Federal Procedure

26

All counsel are expected to familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil

27 Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice of the Eastern District of California, and to keep abreast
28 of any amendments thereto. The Court must insist upon compliance with these Rules if it is to
2

1 efficiently handle its increasing case load and sanctions will be imposed for failure to follow the
2 Rules as provided in both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for
3 the Eastern District of California.
4 6.

Effect of this Order

5

This order represents the best estimate of the court and counsel as to the agenda most

6 suitable to dispose of this case. If the parties determine at any time that the schedule outlined in
7 this order cannot be met, counsel are ordered to notify the court immediately of that fact so that
8 adjustments may be made, either by stipulation or by subsequent status conference.
9

The dates set in this Order are considered to be firm and will not be modified absent

10 a showing of good cause even if the request to modify is made by stipulation. Stipulations
11 extending the deadlines contained herein will not be considered unless they are accompanied
12 by affidavits or declarations, and where appropriate, attached exhibits, which establish good
13 cause for granting the relief requested.
14

The failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions.

15
16 IT IS SO ORDERED.
17
18

Dated:

December 10, 2014

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3