Opinion
2:15-cv-01786-APG-DJA
11-10-2022
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, ALLSTATE PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, ALLSTATE INDEMNITY COMPANY, and ALLSTATE FIRE & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiffs, v. RUSSELL J. SHAH, M.D.; DIPTI R. SHAH, M.D.; RUSSELL J. SHAH, MD, LTD.; DIPTI R. SHAH, MD, LTD.; and RADAR MEDICAL GROUP, LLP dba UNIVERSITY URGENT CARE, Does 1-100, and ROES 101-200, Defendants.
McCORMICK, BARSTOW, SHEPPARD, WAYTE & CARRUTH LLP JONATHAN W. CARLSON TODD W. BAXTER GREGORY S. MASON ERON Z. CANNON JENNIFER M. SMITROVICH FAIN ANDERSON VANDERHOEF ROSENDAHL O'HALLORAN SPILLANE PLLC Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Counterdefendants BAILEY❖KENNEDY DENNIS L. KENNEDY JOSEPH A. LIEBMAN JOSHUA P. GILMORE REBECCA L. CROOKER Attorneys for Defendants & Counterclaimant
McCORMICK, BARSTOW, SHEPPARD, WAYTE & CARRUTH LLP JONATHAN W. CARLSON TODD W. BAXTER GREGORY S. MASON ERON Z. CANNON JENNIFER M. SMITROVICH FAIN ANDERSON VANDERHOEF ROSENDAHL O'HALLORAN SPILLANE PLLC Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Counterdefendants
BAILEY❖KENNEDY DENNIS L. KENNEDY JOSEPH A. LIEBMAN JOSHUA P. GILMORE REBECCA L. CROOKER Attorneys for Defendants & Counterclaimant
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO FILE DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS (TWENTIETH REQUEST)
Defendants and Counterclaimant Russell J. Shah, M.D., Dipti R. Shah M.D., Russell J. Shah, MD, Ltd., Dipti R. Shah, MD, Ltd., and Radar Medical Group, LLP d/b/a University Urgent Care (collectively, the “Radar Parties”) and Plaintiffs/Counterdefendants Allstate Insurance Company, Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance Company, Allstate Indemnity Company, and Allstate Fire & Casualty Insurance Company (collectively, the “Allstate Parties”), by and through their respective attorneys of record, stipulate and agree as follows:
1. On June 9, 2022, the Court entered an Order [ECF No. 435] approving a Stipulation [ECF No. 434] authorizing the Radar Parties to take the Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6) deposition of the Allstate Parties concerning the Counterclaims outside the close of discovery.
2. Following several telephonic meet and confers concerning the topics listed under the Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6) deposition notice (the “Notice”), the parties agreed that certain prior testimony given by Carole LaDuke, in her individual capacity, on August 10, 2021, addressed the information sought by the Radar Parties through Topic No. 1 in the Notice. Accordingly, on October 27, 2022, the parties submitted a Stipulation and proposed Order [ECF No. 451] identifying those portions of Ms. LaDuke's testimony that will be binding upon the Allstate Parties as if Ms. LaDuke had appeared and testified in her capacity as a Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6) designee for the Allstate Parties in response to Topic No. 1.
3. Further, the Allstate Parties identified Aaron Patterson and Patricia Downs to appear as Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6) designees for the Allstate Parties to testify with respect to the remaining topics listed in the Notice. Mr. Patterson's deposition proceeded (via Zoom) on October 3, 2022, with regard to Topic Nos. 3-4, and Ms. Downs' deposition proceeded (in person) on October 4, 2022, with regard to Topic No. 2.
4. Accordingly, the parties have completed all depositions in this case.
5. On August 15, 2022, the Court entered an Order [ECF No. 443] granting the Radar Parties' Motion to Compel the Allstate Parties' Responses to Disputed Discovery Requests [ECF No. 430] (the “August 15, 2022 Order”). In so doing, the Court ordered the Allstate Parties to respond to Request No. 3 in the Radar Parties' Seventh Set of Requests for Production of Documents and Interrogatory Nos. 14 and 15 in Radar Medical Group's Second Set of Interrogatories.
6. On August 29, 2022, the Allstate Parties filed their Partial Objection to the August 15, 2022 Order [ECF No. 444] (the “Partial Objection”). Specifically, the Allstate Parties objected to the portion of the August 15, 2022 Order compelling them to respond to Interrogatory No. 14.
7. On September 26, 2022, the Radar Parties filed their Response to Plaintiff's Partial Objection [ECF No. 449].
8. On September 30, 2022, the Allstate Parties responded to Request No. 3 in accordance with the August 15, 2022 Order by disclosing a spreadsheet, Bates stamped Allstate-Supp Spsheet 000001-000008, containing responsive information.
9. On October 6, 2022, the Court entered an Order [ECF No. 450] denying the Allstate Parties' Partial Objection (the “October 6, 2022 Order”).
10. On October 17, 2022, the Allstate Parties responded to Interrogatory No. 15 in accordance with the August 15, 2022 Order by disclosing a spreadsheet, Bates stamped Allstate-Int15Supp.1 - AllstateInt15Supp.9, containing responsive information.
11. Consistent with the October 6, 2022 Order, the Allstate Parties are in the process of preparing a spreadsheet containing information responsive to Interrogatory No. 14. The Allstate Parties anticipate producing the spreadsheet by November 8, 2022.
12. Pursuant to Stipulation of the parties [ECF No. 447] and Order entered by the Court [ECF No. 448], the parties presently have until November 18, 2022, to file dispositive motions.
13. Since then, one of the lead attorneys for the Allstate Parties unexpectedly had oral arguments scheduled in two unrelated cases on November 3, 2022, and November 8, 2022, before the California Court of Appeals.
14. Due to the number of issues and claimants involved in this case, the volume of discovery that was completed (see, e.g., Order [ECF No. 427] at 2:13-8:6), the parties having only recently received the transcripts of the October 3-4, 2022 Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6) depositions of the Allstate Parties involving the Counterclaims, the recent production of two additional spreadsheets by the Allstate Parties in accordance with the August 15, 2022 Order, the upcoming production of another spreadsheet by the Allstate Parties containing information responsive to Interrogatory No. 14 in accordance with the October 6, 2022 Order, and scheduling conflicts for counsel, good cause exists to extend the deadline for the parties to file dispositive motions by 28 days, until December 16, 2022.
15. The parties do not anticipate any further extensions to the deadline to file dispositive motions.
16. This stipulation is made in good faith and not to delay the proceedings.
IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.
IT IS SO ORDERED.