Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02282/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02282-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DIMITRIUS OLIVER, 

Plaintiff,

 v.

ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS, et

al.

Defendants.

 /

No. C 06-02282 JSW

ORDER RE COUNTERMOTIONS

FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF

RE HEARINGS ON PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO DISMISS AND

ASTRAZENCA’S MOTION TO

STAY

This matter comes before the Court on the motion for administrative relief filed by

Defendants Astrazeneca Pharmaceutical LP and Astrazeneca LP, in which they request that the

Court continue Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss and consolidate that motion for hearing with their

motion to stay. Plaintiff filed a counter-motion for administrative relief, in which he states he

does not oppose a consolidated hearing but requests an earlier hearing date. Defendants oppose

Plaintiff’s counter-motion on the ground that their counsel is unavailable on the dates selected

by Plaintiff.

The Court DENIES both administrative motions, and VACATES the noticed hearing

dates on both the motion to dismiss and the motion to stay. 

Plaintiff’s opposition to the motion to stay is already on file, accordingly, Defendants’

reply brief shall be due on Wednesday August 23, 2006. 

Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss this action was filed on August 4, 2006. Defendant’s 

Case 3:06-cv-02282-JSW Document 22 Filed 08/17/06 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

opposition shall be due on August 23, 2006, and Plaintiff’s reply shall be due on August 30,

2006.

At that time the Court shall take the matters under submission. If the Court believes a

hearing is warranted, it shall notify the parties.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 17, 2006 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-02282-JSW Document 22 Filed 08/17/06 Page 2 of 2