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)

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