County of Santa Cruz et al v. Leavitt

Filing 106

ORDER re: Briefing. Case Management Statement due by 6/22/2012. Case Management Conference set for 6/29/2012 01:30 PM in Courtroom 11, 19th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 3/13/12. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/13/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, et al.,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Plaintiffs,

No. C 07-02888 JSW

v.

12

KATHLEEN SEBELIUS,

13

ORDER

Defendant.
/

14
15

Now pending before the Court is a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary

16

judgment filed by defendant Kathleen Sebelius, in her official capacity as Secretary,

17

Department of Health and Human Services (“Defendant”). In the parties’ joint case

18

management statement, Plaintiffs argue that the administrative record is incomplete. They

19

inform the Court that they intend to file a motion to compel and to augment the administrative

20

record. Plaintiffs contend in a general manner that there are documents that are missing from

21

the administrative record which would be admissible in opposition to Defendant’s motion to

22

dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. Therefore, Plaintiffs urge the Court to

23

hear their motion to compel and to augment the administrative record before adjudicating

24

Defendant’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. Defendants

25

contend their motion should be decided first.

26

Plaintiffs do not identify or describe any particular document missing from the

27

administrative record which they would cite to in opposition to Defendant’s motion. Without a

28

description of such document or documents, the Court cannot determine which motion should
be addressed first. Therefore, the Court HEREBY ORDERS Plaintiffs to file a brief by March

1

23, 2012, no longer than five pages, to address which motion should be heard first. In their

2

brief, Plaintiffs shall identify or otherwise describe what document or documents are missing

3

from the administrative record which they intend to submit in opposition to Defendant’s motion

4

to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. If Plaintiffs are unable to identify or

5

otherwise describe specific documents, Plaintiffs shall do their best to inform the Court of what

6

documents or types of documents they believe exist that are currently missing from the

7

administrative record and would be helpful in opposing Defendant’s motion. Plaintiffs shall

8

also address why their proposed motion should be adjudicated first.

9

Defendant shall file a response to Plaintiffs’ brief by no later than April 2, 2012.
Defendant’s response shall be no longer than five pages. The Court STRIKES Defendant’s

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment without prejudice to refiling

12

once the Court determines which motion it will adjudicate first. The Court FURTHER

13

ORDERS that the case management conference currently set for March 16, 2012 is

14

CONTINUED to June 29, 2012 at 1:30 p.m.

15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17

Dated: March 13, 2012
JEFFREY S. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2