Fonseca v. Kaiser Permanente Medical Center Roseville, et al.

Filing 66

STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/19/2016 ORDERING Defendant Karen Smith to respond to the #64 Second Amended Complaint by 8/31/2016. (Michel, G.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General of California ISMAEL A. CASTRO Supervising Deputy Attorney General ASHANTE L. NORTON Deputy Attorney General State Bar No. 203836 1300 I Street, Suite 125 P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 Telephone: (916) 322-2197 Fax: (916) 324-5567 E-mail: Ashante.Norton@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for Defendant Karen Smith, M.D., in her official capacity as Director of the California Department of Public Health 9 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 13 14 15 JONEE FONSECA, AN INDIVIDUAL PARENT AND GUARDIAN OF ISRAEL STINSON, A MINOR, PLAINTIFF, 16 17 v. Case No. 2:16-cv-00889-KJM-EFB STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO THE SECOND Plaintiff, AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF AND ORDER THEREON 18 [L.R. 144(a)] 19 20 21 22 23 KAISER PERMANENTE MEDICAL CENTER ROSEVILLE; DR. MICHAEL MYETTE M.D.; KAREN SMITH, M.D. IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS DIRECTOR OF THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH; AND DOES 2 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE, Defendants. Judge: The Honorable Kimberly J. Mueller 24 Action Filed: May 9, 2016 25 26 Pursuant to Local Rule 144(a), Plaintiff Jonee Fonseca and Defendant Karen Smith, M.D., 27 in her official capacity as Director of the California Department of Public Health, by and through 28 their respective counsel, hereby stipulate to grant Defendant Karen Smith, M.D. in her official 1 Stipulation Extending Time to Respond to the Second Amended Complaint for Declaratory Relief and Order Thereon (2:16-cv-00889-KJM-EFB) 1 capacity as Director of the California Department of Public Health additional time to respond to 2 Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint for Declaratory Relief, served on July 1, 2016, as follows: 3 WHEREAS, the Second Amended Complaint states claims and issues not raised in the prior 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 complaints; WHEREAS, Defendant Smith desires additional time to prepare and file her responsive pleadings to this action; WHEREAS, Plaintiff is willing to provide additional time for Defendant Smith to prepare and file her responsive pleadings; WHEREAS, the parties have not previously extended the time to respond to the Second Amended Complaint; NOW, THEREFORE, BASED ON THE FOREGOING FACTS, THE PARTIES HEREBY 12 STIPULATE THAT Defendant Smith’s last day to file her response to the Second Amended 13 Complaint for Declaratory Relief on file in this matter is extended from the original due date of 14 July 22, 2016, up to and including August 31, 2016. 15 16 IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED. Dated: July 14, 2016 Respectfully Submitted, 17 KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General of California ISMAEL A. CASTRO Supervising Deputy Attorney General 18 19 /s/ Ashante L. Norton 20 ASHANTE L. NORTON Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendant Karen Smith, M.D. Respectfully Submitted, 21 22 23 Dated: July 14, 2016 24 Pacific Justice Institute 25 /s/ Kevin T. Snider 26 KEVIN T. SNIDER Chief Counsel Attorneys for Plaintiff Jonee Fonseca 27 28 2 Stipulation Extending Time to Respond to the Second Amended Complaint for Declaratory Relief and Order Thereon (2:16-cv-00889-KJM-EFB) 1 2 ORDER THEREON Based on the Parties’ above Joint Stipulation, IT IS HEREBY SO ORDERED THAT 3 Defendant Smith’s time to serve and file a response to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint for 4 Declaratory Relief in the above entitled action be extended from July 22, 2016 to August 31, 5 2016 pursuant to Local Rule 144(a). 6 DATE: July 19, 2016 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Stipulation Extending Time to Respond to the Second Amended Complaint for Declaratory Relief and Order Thereon (2:16-cv-00889-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?