Healy v. Taft Federal Correctional Institution, et al.
Filing
13
AMENDED ORDER re 11 Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Complaint and Continue Scheduling Conference, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 11/12/2014. Status Conference re Consent / Initial Scheduling Conference CONTINUED to 2/23/2015 at 09:00 AM in Bakersfield at 510 19th Street (JLT) before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. (Hall, S)
1
2
3
4
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
ALYSON A. BERG
Assistant United States Attorney
2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401
Fresno, California 93721
Telephone: (559) 497-4000
Facsimile: (559) 497-4099
5
6
Attorneys for Defendant UNITED STATES
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
DANIEL HEALY,
11
Plaintiff,
12
v.
13
TAFT FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL
INSTITUTION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF
PRISONS, MANAGEMENT & TRAINING
CORPORATION,
14
15
Defendants.
16
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 1:14−CV−01224 JLT
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME
TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND
CONTINUE SCHEDULING
CONFERENCE; AMENDED ORDER
(Doc. 11)
Plaintiff Daniel Healy (“Plaintiff”), Defendants United States of America (“United States”)1, and
17
18
Management & Training Corporation (“MTC”) (collectively “the parties”) stipulate, by and through the
19
undersigned counsel, to extend the deadline for the United States and MTC to respond to the complaint
20
to and including December 15, 2014.
The parties further agree to continue the date of the scheduling conference currently set for
21
22
November 18, 2014 at 9:00 a.m. before Magistrate Judge Thurston in Bakersfield, California to
23
February 13, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. before Magistrate Judge Thurston in Bakersfield, California.
24
///
25
26
27
28
1
The United States is the only proper federal defendant because federal agencies cannot be sued for
tort claims. See FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 476 (1994); see also Pink v. Modoc Indian Health
Project, Inc., 157 F.3d 1185, 1188 (9th Cir. 1998) (“Congress did not expressly authorize suits
against federal agencies under the Federal Tort Claims Act.”).
29
30
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND CONTINUE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE; ORDER
1
1
2
3
The parties base this stipulation on good cause, which includes the need for United States to
review the allegations in the Complaint and respond accordingly.
Accordingly, the parties stipulate and agree to continue the time for the United States and MTC
4
to file a responsive pleading to the Complaint and the scheduling conference as specified below, and
5
base it on the above-stated good cause. The parties request the court to endorse this stipulation by way
6
of formal order.
Old Date
New Date
November 21, 2014
December 15, 2014
8
Defendants’ response
to Complaint
(United States and MTC)
9
Scheduling Conference
November 18, 2014
February 13, 2015 @9:00
7
10
Respectfully submitted,
11
12
Dated: November 5, 2014
13
/s/Alyson A. Berg
Alyson A. Berg
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorney for Defendant United States of America
14
15
16
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
Dated: November 5, 2014
WELEBIR, TIERNEY & WEEK, APLC
(As authorized 11/05/2014)
17
/s/Douglas Welebir
Douglas Welebir
Attorneys for Plaintiff Daniel Healy
18
19
20
21
22
Dated: November 4, 2014
BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN LLP
(As authorized 11/04/2014)
/s/Susan E. Coleman
Susan E. Coleman
Attorney for Defendant Management & Training
Corporation (MTC)
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND CONTINUE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE; ORDER
2
ORDER
1
2
Having reviewed the stipulation submitted by the parties, the court hereby extends the time for
3
the United States and MTC to respond to the complaint to December 15, 2014. The scheduling
4
conference currently set for November 18, 2014 is continued to February 23, 2015 at 9:00 a.m.
5
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
November 12, 2014
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND CONTINUE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE; ORDER
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?