Abdou, M.D. et al v. Davita, Inc. et al

Filing 154

ORDER granting 153 and 152 Stipulation; Re: 110 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Responses due by 4/27/2018. Replies due by 5/17/2018. Answer to 146 First Amended Answer and Counterclaim due 4/20/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 3/27/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM) Modified on 3/27/2018 (JM).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 JOHN R. BAILEY Nevada Bar No. 0137 JOSHUA M. DICKEY Nevada Bar No. 6621 KELLY B. STOUT Nevada Bar No. 12105 PAUL C. WILLIAMS Nevada Bar No. 12524 BAILEYKENNEDY 8984 Spanish Ridge Avenue Las Vegas, Nevada 89148-1302 Telephone: 702.562.8820 Facsimile: 702.562.8821 JBailey@BaileyKennedy.com JDickey@BaileyKennedy.com KStout@BaileyKennedy.com PWilliams@BaileyKennedy.com Attorneys for Defendants/Counterclaimants DaVita Inc.; DaVita Medical Holdings, LLC; and DaVita Medical Management, LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 SHERIF W. ABDOU, M.D. and AMIR S. BACCHUS, M.D., Case No. 2:16-cv-02597-APG-CWH STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINES TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS/COUNTERCLAIMANTS’: Plaintiffs, v. DAVITA INC., HEALTHCARE PARTNERS HOLDINGS, LLC, and HEALTHCARE PARTNERS, LLC, Defendants. ________________________________________ AND RELATED CLAIMS. (1) COUNTERMOTION TO MODIFY THE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [ECF NO. 110] (SECOND REQUEST); AND (2) FIRST AMENDED ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIMS (FIRST REQUEST) [ECF 146] 23 Plaintiffs/Counterdefendants Sherif W. Abdou, M.D. and Amir S. Bacchus, M.D. 24 (“Abdou/Bacchus”) and Defendants/Counterclaimants DaVita Inc. (“DaVita”), DaVita Medical 25 Holdings, LLC, f/k/a HealthCare Partners Holdings, LLC (“HCP Holdings”), and DaVita Medical 26 Management, LLC, f/k/a HealthCare Partners, LLC (“HCP”) (collectively, the “DaVita Parties”) 27 (collectively, the “Parties”), stipulate and agree as follows: 28 Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1. On February 21, 2018, the DaVita parties filed their Countermotion to Modify the Preliminary Injunction (“Countermotion”) [ECF 110]. 2. The deadline for Abdou/Bacchus to respond to the Countermotion was March 7, 2018 (“Opposition Due Date”). 3. The deadlines for the DaVita Parties to reply in support of the Countermotion was March 14, 2018 (“Reply Due Date”). 4. The Parties submitted a Stipulation and Order to Extend Response and Reply 8 Deadlines (First Request) on March 5, 2018 [ECF No. 129], and the Court ordered that the 9 Opposition Due Date was extended to March 27, 2018 and the Reply Due Date was extended to 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 April 6, 2018 [ECF No. 132]. 5. On November 15, 2017, the DaVita Parties filed a Motion for Leave to File First Amended Answer and Counterclaims [ECF No. 85]. 6. On March 20, 2018, the Court GRANTED the DaVita Parties’ Motion for Leave to File First Amended Answer and Counterclaims. [ECF 145]. 7. On March 20, 2018, the Court filed the DaVita Parties’ First Amended Answer and Counterclaims [ECF No. 146]. 8. The deadline for Abdou/Bacchus to file their response to the DaVita Parties’ First Amended Answer and Counterclaims is April 3, 2018. 9. On March 8, 2018, Abdou/Bacchus filed a Notice of Appeal [ECF No. 136], 20 appealing to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit the March 7, 2018 order of the 21 district court denying the Motion to Dissolve or Modify Injunction [ECF No. 135]. 22 10. The briefing schedule for the Motion to Dissolve Appeal filed with the Ninth Circuit 23 on March 8, 2018, requires that the opening brief and excerpts of record are due no later than April 24 5, 2018, and the answering brief is due May 3, 2018. 25 11. The Parties agree that the Opposition Due Date should be extended to April 27, 2018, 26 and that the Reply Due Date should be extended to May 17, 2018. This is the second request for an 27 extension of these deadlines and is not intended to cause any delay or prejudice to any party. 28 12. The Parties agree that the date for Abdou/Bacchus to file their response to the First Page 2 of 4 1 Amended Answer and Counterclaims should be extended to April 20, 2018. This is the first request 2 for an extension of this deadline and is not intended to cause any delay or prejudice to any party. 3 13. Due to the time demands associated with the appeal before the United States Court of 4 Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [ECF No. 136] and the press of other business, the Parties request the 5 extension of the above-referenced deadlines. 6 DATED this 26th day of March, 2018. DATED this 26th day of March, 2018. 7 SNELL & WILMER L.L.P. BAILEYKENNEDY 8 By: /s/ Charles E. Gianelloni PATRICK G. BYRNE, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 7636 CHARLES E. GIANELLONI, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 12747 3883 Howard Hughes Parkway Suite 1100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169. Phone: (702) 784-5200 Fax: (702) 784-5252 Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Counterdefendants Sherif W. Abdou, M.D. and Amir S. Bacchus, M.D. By: /s/ Paul C. Williams JOHN R. BAILEY JOSHUA M. DICKEY KELLY B. STOUT PAUL C. WILLIAMS Attorneys for Defendants/Counterclaimants DaVita Inc.; DaVita Medical Holdings, LLC; and DaVita Medical Management, LLC 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 3 of 4 1 ORDER 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. The Opposition Due Date to respond to the Countermotion is 3 extended to April 27, 2018, and that the Reply Due Date in support of the Countermotion is 4 extended to May 17, 2018. 5 6 IT IS FURTHER OREREDED. The deadline for Abdou/Bacchus to file their response to the DaVita Parties’ First Amended Answer and Counterclaims is extended to April 20, 2018. 7 8 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 Dated: 12 Respectfully Submitted by: 13 BAILEYKENNEDY 14 By: /s/ Paul C. Williams JOHN R. BAILEY JOSHUA M. DICKEY KELLY B. STOUT PAUL C. WILLIAMS Attorneys for Defendants/Counterclaimants DaVita Inc.; DaVita Medical Holdings, LLC; and DaVita Medical Management, LLC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 4 of 4 March 27, 2018

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?