Stevenson et al v. Omni Family Health

Filing 13

ORDER ON STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; DIRECTING PARTIES TO FILE COMPLETED CONSENT/DECLINE JURISDICTION FORMS, AND VACATING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker on 1/3/2025. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Defendant shall have until February 3, 2025, to respond to the complaint by filing an answer or other responsive pleading. See Local Rule 144(a); 2. The scheduling conference set for March 3, 2025 (Doc. 4 ) is VAC ATED to be reset as necessary following the ruling on the pending motion to remand (Doc. 11 ) and resolution of the issue of consolidation; and 3. The parties shall file completed consent/decline magistrate judge jurisdiction forms (Doc. 4-3) within seven days of entry of this order. (Deputy Clerk YV)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SCOTT STEVENSON, et al.,

12

Plaintiffs,

13

v.

14

OMNI FAMILY HEALTH,

15

Defendant.

16

Case No. 1:24-cv-01459-JLT-CDB
ORDER ON STIPULATION EXTENDING
TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO
COMPLAINT
(Doc. 12)
ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO FILE
COMPLETED CONSENT/DECLINE
JURISDICTION FORMS
ORDER VACATING MARCH 3, 2025,
SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

17
18

Seven-day Deadline

19
20

Relevant Background

21

On October 25, 2024, Plaintiffs Scott Stevenson and Marcos Montoya (collectively,

22

“Plaintiffs”) initiated this action with the filing of a complaint on behalf of themselves and a

23

putative class of others against Defendant Omni Family Health (“Defendant”) in the Superior

24

Court of the State of California, Kern County, Case No. BCV-24-103675. (Doc. 1). On

25

November 29, 2024, Defendant removed the action to this Court. (Id.). On December 5, 2024,

26

the parties stipulated pursuant to Local Rule 144(a) to extend by 28 days the time for Defendant

27

to respond to the complaint, up to and including January 3, 2025. (Doc. 6). On December 27,

28

2024, Plaintiffs filed the pending motion to remand the action to Kern County Superior Court

1

that is set for hearing on February 3, 2025. (Doc. 11).

2

This action is one of several similar class action suits brought in or removed to this Court

3

in which Plaintiffs assert similar claims against Defendant. See, e.g., Gober Villatoro Guerra v.

4

Omni Family Health, Case No. 1:24-cv-01492-JLT-CDB (“Guerra”) (Doc. 6). In Guerra, the

5

Court noted the class action complaints here and the other Omni actions allege substantially

6

similar facts and nearly identical causes of action against Defendant. (Id. at 1-2) (“From review

7

of the several complaints, it appears these actions arise from a recent, alleged cyberattack

8

resulting in a data breach of sensitive information in the possession and custody and/or control

9

of Defendant (the ‘Data Breach’).”)

10

The Court ordered Defendant to file a Notice of Related Cases in accordance with Local

11

Rule 123(b) in Guerra and the identified Omni actions therein, including the instant action. (Id.

12

at 3). The Court further ordered the parties in Guerra to show cause why this action should or

13

should not be consolidated pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a). (Id.). On

14

December 27, 2024, Defendant filed the Notice of Related Cases and identified as related, inter

15

alia, the instant action. (Guerra, Doc. 8 at ¶ 5). On December 30, 2024, the parties in Guerra

16

filed a joint status report in response to the Court’s show cause order. (Guerra, Doc. 9). Therein,

17

Defendant represents it intends to file a motion to substitute the United States in the matter and

18

all other related Omni matters. (Id. at 1).

19

The Guerra parties represent that they will file in the first filed of the Omni federal

20

actions – Ellen Pace v. Omni Family Health, Case No. 1:24-cv-01277-JLT-CDB – a joint

21

stipulation and proposed order consolidating and staying the Omni actions pending resolution of

22

the earlier of Defendant’s forthcoming motion to substitute or motions to remand in the instant

23

action (Doc. 11) as well as Samantha Abraham, et al. v. Omni Family Health, Case No. 1:24-

24

cv-01456-CDB (“Abraham”) (Abraham, Doc. 7). (Id. at 2).

25

Pending Stipulated Request

26

Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulated request to extend by 30 additional days

27

the time for Defendant to respond to the complaint, through and including February 3, 2025.

28

(Doc. 12). The parties represent the requested extension will allow time for other federal court
2

1

actions filed against Defendant to be consolidated and for the Court to rule on Defendant’s

2

forthcoming motion to substitute the United States in this case as a defendant pursuant to the

3

Federal Tort Claims Act, 42 U.S.C. § 233, as well as the Plaintiffs’ pending motion to remand

4

(Doc. 11). (Doc. 12 at 2). The parties represent that good cause exists to grant the requested

5

extension in the efficiencies from allowing consolidation to occur and ruling on the pending

6

motions to substitute and to remand. (Id.). The parties demonstrate good cause to grant the

7

request.

8

Miscellaneous Matters

9

No party to this action has timely complied with the Court’s order to file completed

10

consent/decline magistrate judge jurisdiction forms. See (Doc. 4-1 at par. 2) (directing parties

11

to file completed consent/decline forms within 14 days of removal of the action from state court);

12

see also id. (“The parties are strongly encouraged to submit their consent forms before the filing

13

of any motion, so the motion can be noticed before the proper judge.”). Accordingly, the parties

14

will be directed to promptly complete and file said forms.

15

Conclusion and Order

16

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

17

1. Defendant shall have until February 3, 2025, to respond to the complaint by filing

18

an answer or other responsive pleading. See Local Rule 144(a);

19

2. The scheduling conference set for March 3, 2025 (Doc. 4) is VACATED to be reset

20

as necessary following the ruling on the pending motion to remand (Doc. 11) and

21

resolution of the issue of consolidation; and

22

3. The parties shall file completed consent/decline magistrate judge jurisdiction forms

23
24
25
26

(Doc. 4-3) within seven days of entry of this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 3, 2025

___________________

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27
28
3