Liu v. Kaiser Permanente Employees Pension Plan for The Permanente Medical Group, Inc.

Filing 48

Order GRANTING 41 Administrative Motion to Bifurcate Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Summary Adjudication. Signed by Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin on February 6, 2024. (amolc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2024)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SHERRY YALI LIU, 7 Plaintiff, 8 v. 9 KAISER PERMANENTE EMPLOYEES PENSION PLAN FOR THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, INC., et al., 10 11 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 23-cv-03109-AMO 12 ORDER GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO BIFURCATE MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION Re: Dkt. No. 41 Defendants. 13 Before the Court is Defendants’ Administrative Motion to Bifurcate Defendants’ Motion to 14 15 Dismiss the First Amended Complaint from Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Adjudication. 16 Having read the parties’ papers and carefully considered their arguments and the relevant legal 17 authority, the Court hereby GRANTS the motion to bifurcate. In particular, the Court finds 18 consideration of summary adjudication imprudent at this stage because Defendants represent that 19 they require additional discovery to defend against Plaintiff’s claims. See generally Fed. R. Civ. 20 Pro. 56(d).1 The Court prefers to consider summary adjudication on a fuller record. 21 The Court accordingly orders that: 22 (1) Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint is bifurcated from Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Adjudication; 23 24 (2) The opposition and reply briefs and hearing on Plaintiff’s MSA are vacated; 25 (3) The parties shall meet and confer on the briefing schedule and hearing date on 26 27 28 Rule 56(d) requires a showing “affidavit or declaration that, for specified reasons, it cannot present facts essential to justify its opposition.” Despite Defendants’ failure to comply with this requirement, the Court finds it appropriate to permit Defendants’ discovery to fully defend against a motion for summary judgment. 1 1 Plaintiff’s MSA and include this proposed schedule in the joint case management 2 statement; and 3 4 5 6 (4) The Court will set these dates at the case management conference or in a post-case management conference scheduling order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 6, 2024 7 8 ARACELI MARTÍNEZ-OLGUÍN United States District Judge 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?