Schneider v. Sutter Amador Hospital et al
| Christopher D. Schneider |
| Department of Motor Vehicles, State of California, Sutter Health, Kurt Popke, Sutter Amador Hospital and Richard F. Buss |
| 2:2014cv00804 |
| March 31, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Amador |
| Allison Claire |
| Garland E. Burrell |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
75
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/22/14 ORDERING that Amador County's 65 Motion to Dismiss and hearing on motion is VACATED. RECOMMENDING that Plaintiff's Rule 41 notices of voluntary dismissal be granted and this action be closed. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. Objections due within 14 days. (Manzer, C)
|
|
Filing
71
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on December 1, 2014. The hearing date of December 10, 2014 is VACATED. Hearing on defendants motion todismiss 65 is continued to January 14, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 26. Plaintiff shall fil e opposition, if any, to the motion to dismiss, no later than December 31, 2014. Failure to file opposition and appear at the hearing will be deemed as a statement of non-opposition and shall result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). (Rivas, A)
|
|
Filing
66
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/28/14 ORDERING that Dr. Buss's request (48-2) for judicial notice is DENIED as unnecessary; Dr. Popke's (50-2) request for judicial notice is DENIED as u nnecessary. RECOMMENDING that the 47 48 50 and 51 Motions to Dismiss be granted as to plaintiff's federal claims, the 49 Motion to Strike be denied, the federal claims be dismissed without leave to amend, and that the remaining state law claims be denied without prejudice to the re-filing of an action in state court. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. Objections due within 14 days.. (Manzer, C)
|
|
Filing
63
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on October 8, 2014. Plaintiffs April 2, 2014 request for electronic document submission, ECF No. 9 is GRANTED. Plaintiff may now file all documents electronically pursuant to Local Rule 133. Plaintiff s September 26, 2014 request for an extension of time 59 is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall have until December 31, 2014 to serve defendants Amador County Department of Public Health, CaliforniaDepartment of Public Health and Amador Emergency Physicians Medical Group.(Rivas, A)
|
|
Filing
44
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/9/2014. Plaintiff's 35 Ex Parte Request to Stay Proceedings is DENIED. The Hearing dates of 6/18/2014 and 6/25/2014 for 27 31 32 Motions to Dismiss are VACATED. The new date for these Motions is CONTINUED to 8/6/2014 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 26 (AC). Should plaintiff choose to amend his pleading, he shall file an Amended Complaint within 21 days of the date of Order. Should plaintiff fail to file an Amended Complaint, plaintiff's Opposition to defendants' Motions to Dismiss shall be due on or before 7/23/2014. (Marciel, M)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 4/14/14 ORDERING that Plaintiff's March 31, 2014 request to seal documents 2 is denied; and the Clerk of the Court is directed to unseal this action. (Becknal, R)
|
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
