Foothill Church, et al. v. Rouillard

Filing 74

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 11/7/2017 ORDERING the Director's deadline to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint, and briefing and hearing on the Director's antic ipated motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint, are set as follows: 12/6/2017: Motion to Dismiss or other response due; 1/5/2018: Opposition to Motion to Dismiss due; 1/26/2018: Reply re Motion Dismiss due; 2/9/2018: Hearing on Motion to Dismiss. The previous Order amending the Scheduling Order (ECF No. 67 ) is MODIFIED as follows: Designation of Expert Witnesses due by 9/14/2018; Discovery due by 8/31/2018; Dispositive Motions heard by 1/11/2019. (Zignago, K.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 XAVIER BECERRA, State Bar No. 118517 Attorney General of California SUSAN M. CARSON, State Bar No. 135875 Supervising Deputy Attorney General JOSHUA N. SONDHEIMER, State Bar No. 152000 Deputy Attorney General 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000 San Francisco, CA 94102-7004 Telephone: (415) 703-5615 Fax: (415) 703-5480 E-mail: Joshua.Sondheimer@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for Defendant Michelle Rouillard, in her official capacity as Director of the California Department of Managed Health Care 8 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 13 14 FOOTHILL CHURCH, CALVARY CHAPEL OF CHINO HILLS and SHEPHERD OF THE HILLS CHURCH, 2:15-CV-02165-KJM-EFB 15 16 17 18 19 20 Plaintiffs, STIPULATION AND ORDER SETTING BRIEFING AND HEARING SCHEDULE v. ON MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND MODIFYING CASE SCHEDULE MICHELLE ROUILLARD, in her official capacity as Director of the California Department of Managed Health Care, Defendant. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIP. AND ORDER RE MOTION TO DISMISS AND CASE SCHEDULES (2:15-CV-02165-KJM-EFB) 1 Defendant Michelle Rouillard, in her official capacity as Director of the California 2 Department of Managed Health Care (Director), and Plaintiffs Foothill Church, Calvary Chapel 3 Chino Hills, and Shepherd of the Hills Church, by and through their attorneys of record, stipulate 4 to and apply for an order extending the Director’s time to answer or otherwise respond to 5 Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief (Second Amended 6 Complaint), setting a briefing and hearing schedule on the Director’s anticipated motion to 7 dismiss the Second Amended Complaint, and the modifying the previous Order amending the 8 Scheduling Order (ECF No. 67). 9 10 11 In support of this application, the parties state that WHEREAS: 1. The Court has granted the Director’s motions to dismiss Plaintiffs’ initial Complaint and a First Amended Complaint, with leave to amend (ECF Nos. 39 and 68); 12 2. Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint on October 23, 2017 (ECF 72); 13 3. The Director anticipates moving to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint, 14 and the parties wish to establish a mutually agreeable schedule for briefing and hearing on the 15 anticipated motion; 16 4. The parties have made initial disclosures and served written discovery, but believe 17 that consistent with the Court’s previous orders continuing discovery and other pretrial deadlines 18 while the Director’s prior motions to dismiss remained pending (see ECF Nos. 63, 65, and 67), it 19 would be efficient and economical for both the Court and parties to further modify the Scheduling 20 Order so that service of responses to written discovery and other discovery need not proceed until 21 after the Court rules on the Director’s anticipated motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended 22 Complaint; 23 5. Consistent with the above and their prior stipulations, the parties agree that if the case 24 schedule is modified as requested below, the deadlines for responses to pending written discovery 25 may be extended until 90 days before the deadline for the close of discovery, and that they will 26 not pursue further discovery until after the Court’s ruling on the Director’s anticipated motion to 27 dismiss or 120 days before the close of discovery, whichever is earlier; 28 1 STIP. AND ORDER RE MOTION TO DISMISS AND CASE SCHEDULES (2:15-CV-02165-KJM-EFB) 1 WHEREFORE, the parties STIPULATE that upon the Court’s order: 2 6. The Director’s deadline to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ Second 3 Amended Complaint, and briefing and hearing on the Director’s anticipated motion to dismiss 4 Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint, shall be set as follows: 5  December 6, 2017: Motion to Dismiss or other response due; 6  January 5, 2018: Opposition to Motion to Dismiss due; 7  January 26, 2018: Reply re Motion Dismiss due; 8  February 9, 2018: Hearing on Motion to Dismiss (or other date set by the Court); and 9 that 10 7. In light of the above, good cause exists to modify the case schedule to extend the time 11 for discovery and to modify other case deadlines respectively, and that the previous Order 12 amending the Scheduling Order (ECF No. 67) shall be modified as follows: 13 Description 14 15 Existing Date (See ECF No. 67) New Date March 2, 2018 August 31, 2018 Expert Disclosures March 16, 2018 September 14, 2018 Supplemental Expert Disclosures May 1, 2018 October 30, 2018 June 1, 2018 November 30, 2018 Hearing on Dispositive Motions 17 Discovery Cutoff Completion of Expert Discovery 16 July 13, 2018 January 11, 2019 File Joint Pretrial Conference Statement Final Pretrial Conference Trial Briefs Due Trial Vacated. To be reset after court resolves any dispositive motions. Vacated. To be reset after court resolves any dispositive motions. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 // // // // 28 2 STIP. AND ORDER RE MOTION TO DISMISS AND CASE SCHEDULES (2:15-CV-02165-KJM-EFB) 1 2 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 3 4 5 Dated: October 31, 2017 6 XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California SUSAN M. CARSON Supervising Deputy Attorney General 7 8 /s/ Joshua Sondheimer JOSHUA N. SONDHEIMER Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendant Michelle Rouillard, in her official capacity as Director of the California Department of Managed Health Care 9 10 11 12 13 Dated: October 31, 2017 ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM 14 15 /s/ Jeremiah Galus (as authorized on 10/31/17) JEREMIAH GALUS (admitted pro hac vice) ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM 15100 N. 90th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85260 (480) 444-0020 jgalus@ADFlegal.org Attorneys for Plaintiffs Foothill Church, Calvary Chapel Chino Hills, and Shepherd of the Hills Church 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 SF2015403026 41872600.docx 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 STIP. AND ORDER RE MOTION TO DISMISS AND CASE SCHEDULES (2:15-CV-02165-KJM-EFB) 1 ORDER 2 Upon the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing: 3 1. The Director’s deadline to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ Second 4 Amended Complaint, and briefing and hearing on the Director’s anticipated motion to dismiss 5 Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint, are set as follows: 6  December 6, 2017: Motion to Dismiss or other response due; 7  January 5, 2018: Opposition to Motion to Dismiss due; 8  January 26, 2018: Reply re Motion Dismiss due; 9  February 9, 2018: Hearing on Motion to Dismiss. 10 11 2. The previous Order amending the Scheduling Order (ECF No. 67) shall be modified as follows: 12 Description 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Existing Date (See ECF No. 67) New Date Discovery Cutoff March 2, 2018 August 31, 2018 Expert Disclosures March 16, 2018 September 14, 2018 Supplemental Expert Disclosures May 1, 2018 October 30, 2018 Completion of Expert Discovery June 1, 2018 November 30, 2018 Hearing on Dispositive Motions July 13, 2018 January 11, 2019 File Joint Pretrial Conference Statement Final Pretrial Conference Trial Briefs Due Trial Briefs Due Vacated. To be reset after court resolves any dispositive motions. Vacated. To be reset after court resolves any dispositive motions. This amendment does not alter any other portions of the initial scheduling order (ECF No. 51). 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 DATED: November 7, 2017. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 27 28 4 STIP. AND ORDER RE MOTION TO DISMISS AND CASE SCHEDULES (2:15-CV-02165-KJM-EFB)

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?