Opinion
ANDREW H. SELESNICK, DAMARIS L. MEDINA, KETAKEE R. KANE, MICHELMAN & ROBINSON, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Troy A. Schell, Esq., Bryan Wong, Esq., PRIME HEALTHCARE SERVICES, INC., Ontario, California, Attorneys for Plaintiff.
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, BOBBIE J. MONTOYA, Assistant United States Attorney, Sacramento, CA, Attorneys for Defendant.
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE TO FILE A RESPONSIVE PLEADING [L.R. 144(A)]
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
Plaintiff Prime Healthcare Services - Shasta, LLC ("Plaintiff"), and Defendant Sylvia Burwell, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, ("Defendant") by and through their attorneys, hereby stipulate, subject to approval of the Court, to the following:
Plaintiff has filed a total of 9 cases challenging determinations by the Medicare Appeals Council that Plaintiff lacked standing to appeal the denial of its claims for payment for emergency medical services provided to Medicare beneficiaries between November 2008 and February 2009. These cases are as follows:
(1) Prime Healthcare Services - Shasta, LLC v. Burwell, 2:14-cv-02791-TLN-KJN.
(2) Prime Healthcare Services - Shasta, LLC v. Burwell, 2:15-cv-00154-TLN-KJN.
(3) Prime Healthcare Services - Shasta, LLC v. Burwell, 2:15-cv-00324-TLN-KJN.
(4) Prime Healthcare Services - Shasta, LLC v. Burwell, 2:15-cv-00400-TLN-KJN.
(5) Prime Healthcare Services - Shasta, LLC v. Burwell, 2:15-cv-00450-TLN-KJN.
(6) Prime Healthcare Services - Shasta, LLC v. Burwell, 2:15-cv-00473-TLN-KJN.
(7) Prime Healthcare Services - Shasta, LLC v. Burwell, 2:15-cv-00474-TLN-KJN.
(8) Prime Healthcare Services - Shasta, LLC v. Burwell, 2:15-cv-00709-TLN-KJN.
(9) Prime Healthcare Services - Shasta, LLC v. Burwell, 2:15-cv-01120-TLN-KJN.
In light of Plaintiff attorneys' workload, which includes an arbitration, mediation, and depositions in November, a mediation and depositions in December, and an arbitration in January, the parties hereby stipulate, subject to the approval of the Court, to the following proposed briefing schedule:
Deadline for Plaintiff's Oppositions to Defendant's Motions to Dismiss: January 14, 2016
Deadline for Defendant's Replies in Support of Defendant's Motion to
Hearing on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss: February 25, 2016
Although the parties have not previously asked for an extension of time to file an opposition to Defendant's motions to dismiss, the parties have previously filed several stipulations for extensions of time to file a responsive pleading to the original Complaint. The parties appreciate the Court's patience in this matter. MICHELMAN & ROBINSON
ORDER
Pursuant to stipulation and good cause having been shown, IT IS SO ORDERED.