Brand Surgical Institute v. Novartis Corporation et al
Plaintiff: Brand Surgical Insitute and Brand Surgical Institute
Defendant: Novartis Corporation and Does 1-10
Case Number: 2:2022cv05848
Filed: August 18, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Office: Western Division - Los Angeles Office
Presiding Judge: Percy Anderson
Referring Judge: Rozella A Oliver
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Insurance Contract
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 30, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 30, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER ON STIPULATION TO DISMISS ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE by Judge Percy Anderson. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: 1. This action, Case No. 2:22-cv-05848-PA-RAO, is dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice; and 2. Each party shall bear their own costs and fees. RE: Stipulation for Order, #20 . Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (aco)
September 30, 2022 Filing 20 STIPULATION for Order [proposed] Order on Stipulation to Dismiss Entire Action With Prejudice filed by Defendant Novartis Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order [proposed] Order on Stipulation to Dismiss Entire Action With Prejudice)(Lewis, Carol)
September 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 19 TEXT ONLY ENTRY ORDER by Judge Percy Anderson: On the Courts own motion, Scheduling Conference currently set for hearing on October 3, 2022 is hereby VACATED. No appearances are necessary. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (kss) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
September 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 18 MINUTES ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Percy Anderson. Accordingly, the court, on its own motion, orders plaintiff to show cause in writing on or before October 12, 2022, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. (See document for further details). (aco)
September 23, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 17 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS - ORDER by Judge Percy Anderson: The Court has been advised by counsel that this matter has settled. The parties have ten (10) days from the date of this order or until the next scheduled court appearance, whichever is shorter, to file with the court a dismissal of the action or to appear, in-person or telephonically with their clients, to place the settlement on the record. The parties may contact the deputy clerk of the court to calendar the appearance. If the parties do not dismiss the action or do not place the settlement on the record, thematter will remain on the Court's active trial calendar with all pretrial and trial dates ineffect. (bm)
September 23, 2022 Filing 16 NOTICE of Settlement filed by Defendant Novartis Corporation. (Lewis, Carol)
September 20, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER DENYING PROPOSED ORDER ON SECOND STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT #14 by Judge Percy Anderson. (rolm)
September 20, 2022 Filing 14 Second STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Brand Surgical Institute answer now due 10/21/2022, filed by Defendant Novartis Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Lewis, Carol)
September 16, 2022 Filing 13 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan ; estimated length of trial 2 Days, filed by Defendant Novartis Corporation.. (Lewis, Carol)
August 22, 2022 Filing 12 SCHEDULING MEETING OF COUNSEL [FRCP 16, 26(f)] by Judge Percy Anderson. SCHEDULING CONFERENCE set for October 3, 2022, at 10:30 a.m. This action has been assigned to the calendar of United States District Judge Percy Anderson. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS). (aco)
August 22, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 11 STANDING ORDER by Judge Percy Anderson. READ THIS ORDER CAREFULLY. IT CONTROLS THE CASE AND DIFFERS IN SOME RESPECTS FROM THE LOCAL RULES. This action has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Percy Anderson. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS). (aco)
August 22, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER TO REASSIGN CASE due to self-recusal pursuant to General Order 21-01 by Judge Christina A. Snyder. Case transferred from Judge Christina A. Snyder to the calendar of Judge Percy Anderson for all further proceedings. Case number now reads as 2:22-cv-05848 PA(RAOx). (rn)
August 19, 2022 Filing 9 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to filed by Defendant Novartis Corporation.(Lewis, Carol)
August 19, 2022 Filing 8 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (sh)
August 19, 2022 Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (sh)
August 19, 2022 Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Christina A. Snyder and Magistrate Judge Rozella A. Oliver. (sh)
August 18, 2022 CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does, Novartis Corporation. Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiff Brand Surgical Institute.[FILED IN STATE COURT 07/20/2022 SUBMITTED AS ATTACHMENT NO.2 TO THE NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ] (sh)
August 18, 2022 Filing 5 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant Novartis Corporation, re Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #4 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Declaration #3 , Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 Proof of Service served on August 18, 2022. (Lewis, Carol)
August 18, 2022 Filing 4 Novartis Corporation's CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Novartis Corporation, identifying Novartis Corporation. (Attorney William E von Behren added to party Novartis Corporation(pty:dft))(von Behren, William)
August 18, 2022 Filing 3 DECLARATION of Carol B. Lewis re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 Notice of Removal filed by Defendant Novartis Corporation. (Lewis, Carol)
August 18, 2022 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Novartis Corporation. (Lewis, Carol)
August 18, 2022 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number 22STCV23417 Receipt No: ACACDC-33834571 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Novartis Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit State Summons, #2 Exhibit State Complaint, #3 Exhibit State Notice of Removal) (Attorney Carol B Lewis added to party Novartis Corporation(pty:dft))(Lewis, Carol)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Brand Surgical Institute v. Novartis Corporation et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Brand Surgical Insitute
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Brand Surgical Institute
Represented By: Jonathan Aaron Stieglitz
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Novartis Corporation
Represented By: William E von Behren
Represented By: Carol B Lewis
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Does 1-10
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?