Palacio, et al v. United States of America
Filing
98
STIPULATION and ORDER to modify the amended Pretrial Conference Order regarding trial witnesses signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 4/16/15. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
1 United States Attorney
VICTORIA L. BOESCH
2 CHI SOO KIM
Assistant United States Attorneys
3 501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
4 Telephone: (916) 554-2700
Facsimile: (916) 554-2900
5
Attorneys for the United States
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
10
I.P., A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HER
GUARDIAN AD LITEM, FACUNDO
PALACIO DIAZ; MICAELA PALACIO,
CASE NO. 2:13-CV-01012 JAM-CKD
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO MODIFY
THE AMENDED PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
ORDER REGARDING TRIAL WITNESSES
11
Plaintiffs,
12
v.
13
Judge: Hon. John A. Mendez
Crtrm: 6, 14th floor
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
14
Defendant.
15
16
17
TRIAL DATE: MAY 26, 2015
I.P., A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HER
GUARDIAN AD LITEM, FACUNDO
PALACIO DIAZ; MICAELA PALACIO,
18
Plaintiffs,
19
vs.
20
BANNER HEALTH, AN ARIZONA
CORPORATION, doing business as BANNER
LASSEN MEDICAL CENTER; DOES 100200,
Defendants.
21
22
23
24
Plaintiffs and the United States respectfully request modification of the Court’s Amended
25 Pretrial Conference Order (Dkt. 77) regarding trial witnesses for good cause. The United States has
26 been informed that Plaintiffs and Banner recently settled their claims, that Banner is withdrawing its
27
28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO MODIFY THE AMENDED PRETRIAL CONFERENCE ORDER
REGARDING TRIAL WITNESSES
1
1 expert witnesses, and that Plaintiffs are withdrawing some of their experts. During meet and confer
2 discussions, the parties reached certain agreements as reflected below.
3 A.
Neither Plaintiffs Nor the United States Will Offer Neuroradiologist Testimony at Trial
4
Plaintiffs and the United States stipulate to the following:
5
1.
6
Neuroradiologists analyzing the May 1, 2012 ultrasound and the May 7, 2012 MRI of
I.P.’s brain concluded that those images are consistent with I.P. having experienced
7
hypoxic ischemic injury of the acute profound pattern.
8
2.
9
A hypoxic ischemic injury of the acute profound pattern results from a near-total
10
cessation of oxygenated blood reaching the fetus for a short amount of time, typically
11
10 to 20 minutes.
12
3.
13
These imaging results are consistent with I.P. having experienced a sentinel event such
as a cord compression occurring within the last 15 to 20 minutes prior to birth.
14
15
16
As a result of this stipulation, Plaintiffs withdraw their expert witnesses Dr. Patrick Barnes and
Dr. Jerome Barakos and the United States withdraws it expert witness Dr. Gordon Sze.
17
B.
18
19
20
Plaintiffs Withdraw Three Other Witnesses
Plaintiffs will present only one neonatologist, Dr. William Rhine, at trial and withdraw
neonatologist Dr. Michael Sherman. Plaintiffs also withdraw Maternal Fetal Medicine Dr. Richard H.
Paul and Nurse Laura Mahlmeister.
21
CONCLUSION
22
23
24
The parties respectfully request modification of the Court’s Amended Pretrial Conference
Order to reflect the parties’ Neuroradiology stipulation and the withdrawal of experts Dr. Barnes, Dr.
Barakos, Dr. Sze, Dr. Sherman, Dr. Paul, and Nurse Mahlmeister.
25
26
27
28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO MODIFY THE AMENDED PRETRIAL CONFERENCE ORDER
REGARDING TRIAL WITNESSES
2
Respectfully submitted,
1
2
3
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
Dated: April 15, 2015
/s/ Victoria L. Boesch
VICTORIA L. BOESCH
Assistant United States Attorney
4
5
Attorneys for Defendant United States
6
7
8
Dated: April 15, 2015
/s/ Bruce G. Fagel (authorized 4/15/15)
BRUCE G. FAGEL
LAW OFFICES OF BRUCE G. FAGEL
& ASSOCIATES
9
10
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
11
12
13
IT IS SO ORDERED.
14
15 DATED: 4/16/2015
/s/ John A. Mendez_______________________
16
JOHN A. MENDEZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO MODIFY THE AMENDED PRETRIAL CONFERENCE ORDER
REGARDING TRIAL WITNESSES
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?