Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-01351/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-01351-65/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

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

1

Plaintiffs originally filed a statement of non-opposition but subsequently filed a brief

expressing concerns with the Receiver’s motion following receipt of the State Personnel

Board’s opposition. Defendants filed a statement of non-opposition to the Receiver’s motion,

and the Union of American Physicians and Dentists filed an amicus curiae brief in support of

the motion. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARCIANO PLATA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER,

et al.,

Defendants.

NO. C01-1351 TEH

ORDER REQUIRING

SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING

RE: RECEIVER’S MOTION FOR

WAIVER OF STATE LAW RE:

PHYSICIAN CLINICAL

COMPETENCY

DETERMINATIONS

On January 7, 2008, the Receiver filed a supplemental memorandum in support of his

pending motion for a waiver of state law regarding physician clinical competency

determinations. It appears, but is not entirely clear, from the Receiver’s supplemental

memorandum that several of the objections raised by Plaintiffs and the State Personnel Board

have now been resolved.1

 To clarify what issues remain contested in the Receiver’s motion,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiffs and the State Personnel Board shall each file a supplemental opposition

or statement of non-opposition to the Receiver’s January 7, 2008 supplemental memorandum

on or before January 22, 2008.

2. The Receiver shall file a supplemental reply brief on or before January 29, 2008.

Case 3:01-cv-01351-JST Document 1051 Filed 01/11/08 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

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

2

3. The matter will then be deemed submitted on the papers unless the Court

determines that oral argument is necessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 01/11/08 

THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 3:01-cv-01351-JST Document 1051 Filed 01/11/08 Page 2 of 2