Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-00825/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-00825-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 31:3729 False Claims Act

---

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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

ex rel. ROBERT EDWARDS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ST. LUKE’S HOSPITAL, et al.,

Defendants.

NO. C03-0825 TEH 

ORDER CONTINUING CASE

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

AND STAYING BRIEFING

SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO REVERSE SPECIAL

MASTER’S MAY 22, 2007

DECISION

Special Master Edward Swanson has informed the Court that he anticipates issuing an

order regarding issues related to former St. Luke’s Hospital employee Giri Sastromihardjo

within the next week. Mr. Swanson also informed the Court that the parties requested that

the upcoming case management conference be continued until after the Sastromihardjo issues

have been further resolved. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the case

management conference scheduled for July 23, 2007, is continued to September 10, 2007, at

1:30 PM. The parties shall meet and confer and file a joint case management statement on or

before September 4, 2007.

Additionally, because Mr. Swanson’s order may moot part or all of Defendants’

pending motion, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that briefing on Defendants’ motion to reverse

the Special Master’s May 22, 2007 decision regarding in camera review of privileged

information shall be stayed until further order of the Court, and the July 23, 2007 motion

hearing shall be vacated. Within ten calendar days after Mr. Swanson issues his order

regarding the Sastromihardjo issues, Defendants shall file with this Court either a request to

Case 3:03-cv-00825-TEH Document 190 Filed 07/02/07 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

withdraw their motion or a statement explaining why parts or all of the motion remain

relevant following Mr. Swanson’s decision. If necessary, the Court will then issue an

appropriate scheduling order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 07/02/07 

 THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 3:03-cv-00825-TEH Document 190 Filed 07/02/07 Page 2 of 2