United States District CourtFor the Northern District of California1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District CourtFor the Northern District of CaliforniaIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
Richard Randall,
Plaintiff(s),
v.
Medtronic Inc., O’Connor Hospital,
Defendant(s).
/
NO. C 05-03707 JW
ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE
FOR PENDING MOTIONS; REFERRING
PARTIES TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Defendant Medtronic Inc. (“Medtronic”) removed this action on September 14, 2005. The
following day, Medtronic filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, and noticed the motion for
hearing on October 24, 2005. The next day, Medtronic filed a motion for summary judgment and
similarly noticed the motion for hearing on October 24, 2005. On September 20, 2005, Plaintiff
Richard Randall (“Randall”) filed a motion to remand and noticed the motion for hearing on October
31, 2005.
Presently before the Court is Randall’s motion to enlarge the time to file oppositions to
Medtronic’s two motions, and to shorten the deadline for the parties to confer as required by Rule
26(f), Fed.R.Civ.P. Medtronic has filed an opposition to the motion.
Having reviewed the papers, the Court orders as follows. For the sake of judicial economy,
Medtronic’s two motions and Plaintiff’s motion are all tentatively continued to December 12, 2005,
9:00 a.m. The request to shorten the deadline for the parties to confer as required by Rule 26(f), as
well as any and all discovery disputes, are referred to Magistrate Judge Seeborg. If Magistrate Judge
Seeborg determines that Randall must engage in discovery before responding to any of the motions and
Case 5:05-cv-03707-JW Document 27 Filed 09/28/2005 Page 1 of 3
Randall v. Medtronic Inc. et al
Doc. 27
Dockets.Justia.com
United States District CourtFor the Northern District of California1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14