United States of America, et al. v. Dynamic Medical Systems, LLC., et al.

Filing 162

ORDER REQUIRING RELATOR THOMAS TURNER TO FILE AN OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO CONTINUE THE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 7/26/2022. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Relator Thomas Turner shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendants' motion to continue the mandatory scheduling conference within fourteen (14) days of entry of this order.(Gonzales, V)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

12

ORDER REQUIRING RELATOR THOMAS
TURNER TO FILE AN OPPOSITION OR
STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO CONTINUE
THE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS

v.

13
14

Case No. 1:17-cv-01757-JLT-SAB

DYNAMIC MEDICAL SYSTEMS, LLC, et
al.,

15
Defendants.

(ECF No. 161)

16
17

Following adjudication of motions to dismiss and the filing of a second amended

18 complaint, a scheduling conference is currently set for August 23, 2022. (ECF Nos. 135, 138,
19 141.) On May 9 and 10, 2022, motions to dismiss were filed that are currently pending before
20 the District Judge. (ECF Nos. 144, 145, 146.) On July 26, 2022, Defendant filed a motion to
21 continue the scheduling conference. (ECF No. 161.) The motion states that Relator Thomas
22 Turner opposes the continuance of the scheduling conference. (Id.) The Court shall order any
23 opposition be filed within fourteen (14) days.
24 / / /
25 / / /
26 / / /
27 / / /
28 / / /’

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Relator Thomas Turner shall file an

1

2 opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendants’ motion to continue the mandatory
3 scheduling conference within fourteen (14) days of entry of this order.1
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6 Dated:

July 26, 2022
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1

The Court notes that it has repeatedly engaged in the exercise in this matter of granting Defendants’ motions to

27 continue the scheduling conference. (See ECF Nos. 89, 115, 120, 124, 132.) The Court again notifies the parties’ of
the Court’s general practice of monitoring scheduling conferences for readiness, and continuing such conferences

28 sua sponte when there are motions pending that make scheduling conferences unproductive.
2