Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital v. Sebelius et al
Filing
36
STIPULATION AND ORDER to Extend Defendant's Deadline to Respond to Amended Complaint and to Continue Initial Case Management Conference. Case Management Statement due by 4/10/2015. Case Management Conference set for 4/17/2015 10:00 AM in Courtroom 1, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 01/26/2015. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/26/2015)
1 MELINDA HAAG (CABN 132612)
United States Attorney
2 ALEX G. TSE (CABN 152348)
Chief, Civil Division
3 JENNIFER S WANG (CABN 233155)
Assistant United States Attorney
4
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055
San Francisco, California 94102-3495
5
Telephone: (415) 436-6967
FAX: (415) 436-6748
6
jennifer.s.wang@usdoj.gov
7
Attorneys for Defendant
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
12
SANTA ROSA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL,
13
14
15
16
17
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
SYLVIA MATHEWS BURWELL, IN HER
)
OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF )
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
)
)
Defendant.
CASE NO. C14-1345 SC
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEFENDANT’S
DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO AMENDED
COMPLAINT AND TO CONTINUE INITIAL
CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
18
19
Subject to the approval of the Court, defendant Sylvia Matthews Burwell and plaintiff Santa
20
Rosa Memorial Hospital, by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:
21
1. Plaintiff’s Complaint was filed on March 24, 2014. While the parties engaged in initial settlement
22
discussions, the parties stipulated to extend defendant’s time to respond to the Complaint until
23
October 30, 2014. On October 30, 2014, defendant filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of
24
Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6).
25
2. On November 14, 2014, pursuant to stipulation by the parties, the Court ordered plaintiff to file an
26
Amended Complaint in lieu of filing an opposition to defendant’s motion to dismiss by November
27
20, 2014. The Court set January 30, 2015 as the deadline for defendant’s response to the Amended
28
STIP. TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO AM. COMPL & TO CONTINUE CMC
C14-1345 SC
1
1
Complaint, and continued the initial case management conference to February 20, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
2 3. Plaintiff filed its Amended Complaint on November 20, 2014.
3 4. The parties are currently engaged in settlement negotiations. To provide further time for those
4
negotiations and to avoid potentially unnecessary litigation, the parties have stipulated to extend
5
defendant’s deadline to respond to the Amended Complaint by sixty (60) days, from January 30,
6
2015 until March 31, 2015. For the same reason and so that defendant’s responsive pleading is on
7
file before the initial case management conference, the parties respectfully request that the initial
8
case management conference currently set for February 20, 2015, at 10:00 a.m., be continued to
9
April 17, 2015, at 10:00 a.m.
10 IT IS SO STIPULATED.
11
Respectfully submitted,
12
MELINDA HAAG
United States Attorney
13
14 DATED: January 21, 2015
15
16 DATED: January 21, 2015
17
18
_/s/______________________
JENNIFER S WANG
Assistant United States Attorney
_/s/______________________
JASON T. LUNDY
POLSINELLI PC
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital
19
20
21
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation and good cause having been shown, it is ordered that defendant’s
22 response to the Amended Complaint is due on or before March 31, 2015. The initial case management
23
conference is continued from February 20, 2015 to April 17, 2015 at 10:00 a.m., and the parties’ joint
24
case management statement is due on or before April 10, 2015.
25
S
R NIA
__________________________
HON. SAMUEL CONTI
onti
amuel C
Judge S
United States District Judge
LI
H
E
A
RT
FO
NO
28
UNIT
ED
27 DATED:____________________
01/26/2015
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
RT
U
O
26
IT IS SO ORDERED.
RN
STIP. TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO AM. COMPL & TO CONTINUE CMC O F C
D IS T IC T
R
C14-1345 SC
2
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?