Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00991/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00991-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 470
Nature of Suit: Civil (Rico)
Cause of Action: 18:1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act

---

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

L421307 1

RENEW ED AND AMENDED JOINT REQUEST/ REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION AND

STIPULATION OF PARTIES EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE (PER LOCAL RULE

6-144(a)); [PROPOSED] ORDER

BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP

Robert S. Robinson, SBN: 131461

Jenny A. Covington, SBN: 233625 

(not admitted in E. Dist.)

879 West 190th Street, Suite 700

Gardena, California 90248-4227

Tel: (310) 768-3068

Fax: (310) 719-1019

Attorneys for Defendant

SMITHS MEDICAL

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BARBARA JEAN GRAHAM,

deceased, JOSEPH GRAHAM, as

the Executor of the Estate of

Barbara Jean Graham on behalf of

the HEIRS. 

Plaintiffs,

v. 

SMITHS MEDICAL, MED ALERT

and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: 1:07-CV-00991-LJO-NEW

RENEWED AND AMENDED JOINT

STIPULATION OF PARTIES

EXTENDING TIME FOR

DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE 

(PER LOCAL RULE 6-144(a));

[PROPOSED] ORDER

{Prior and First Request for an

Extension Denied on 8/24/07}

Trial Date: None

Case 1:07-cv-00991-LJO-GSA Document 11 Filed 08/24/07 Page 1 of 6
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

L421307 2

RENEW ED AND AMENDED JOINT REQUEST/ REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION AND

STIPULATION OF PARTIES EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE (PER LOCAL RULE

6-144(a)); [PROPOSED] ORDER

TO THE HONORABLE LAWRENCE J. O’NEILL, JUDGE OF THE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:

Plaintiffs Barbara Jean Graham, deceased, and Joseph Graham, on

the one hand, and Defendant Smiths Medical, on the other, hereby

stipulate, pursuant to Local Rule 6-144(a), for a 30-day extension of the

time for this Defendant to file and serve its initial response to the

Complaint as follows:

RECITALS

1. Plaintiffs Barbara Jean Graham, deceased, and Joseph

Graham initiated this case on July 11, 2007 in the United States District

Court for the Eastern District of California.

2. Defendant, Smiths Medical was not served with the

Complaint, but instead received notice of this pending action for the first

time through service of the First Amended Complaint.

3. Plaintiffs’ counsel represents that he could not discuss his

clients’ potential claims with Smiths Medical before filing this action

because he first had contact with them too close to the statute of

limitations.

4. Defendant Smiths Medical has received no prior extension of

time to respond as the First Stipulation filed on August 20, 2007 was

denied by the Court today, August 24, 2007 and the Court has ordered

Defendant Smiths Medical's to file its responsive pleading(s) by August

27, 2007.

5. Upon receipt of the First Amended Complaint, counsel for

Smiths Medical immediately contacted Plaintiffs’ counsel and counsel for

both parties held a lengthy and substantive discussion about the facts

Case 1:07-cv-00991-LJO-GSA Document 11 Filed 08/24/07 Page 2 of 6
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

L421307 3

RENEW ED AND AMENDED JOINT REQUEST/ REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION AND

STIPULATION OF PARTIES EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE (PER LOCAL RULE

6-144(a)); [PROPOSED] ORDER

and the legal theories of the case, which discussion has continued, and

included the following topics: 

a. Whether Plaintiffs’ RICO claim pleaded in Plaintiffs' First

Amended Complaint is appropriate in a products liability action at all and

with the amount and detail of facts;

b. Whether Plaintiffs’ fraud claim pleaded in Plaintiffs' First

Amended Complaint is appropriate in a products liability action at all and

with the amount and detail of facts;

c. Whether Plaintiffs’ survivorship claims pleaded in

Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint are barred by the two-year statute of

limitations; 

d. Whether Plaintiffs’ punitive damages request was

appropriate in this products liability action based on the amount and detail

of facts pleaded;

e. That, prior to any substantive discussions of settlement

occurring in the product liability case, Smiths Medical would need to

examine the pump; 

f. Plaintiffs’ counsel did not have possession of the pump

and would undertake an effort to locate the chemotherapy pump, which

was last in a physician’s or hospital’s possession; and

g. The Parties would seek an extension, through the Local

Rules procedures, for time for Plaintiffs’ counsel to locate the pump and

to evaluate the potential challenges to Plaintiffs RICO, fraud, and

survivorship claims for relief.

6. Counsel for Plaintiffs and Smiths Medical both mistakenly

understood that Local Rule 6-144(a) did not require this Court’s approval

Case 1:07-cv-00991-LJO-GSA Document 11 Filed 08/24/07 Page 3 of 6
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

L421307 4

RENEW ED AND AMENDED JOINT REQUEST/ REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION AND

STIPULATION OF PARTIES EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE (PER LOCAL RULE

6-144(a)); [PROPOSED] ORDER

for an initial, stipulated extension of time for Smiths Medical’s initial

response to the First Amended Complaint.

7. The Parties’ counsel have used the time since their initial

discussion to informally discuss and investigate the facts, including the

location of the chemotherapy pump which has not yet been located, and

have not addressed the legal issues underlying Plaintiffs’ claims

underlying their claims for relief because counsel mistakenly believed

their Stipulation did not require Court approval.

8. The Parties believe that it will be productive and is otherwise

in the interest of justice that Defendant Smiths Medical have a 30-day

extension of time from the date that its initial response to the Complaint

currently was due, August 22, 2007, to September 21, 2007, within which

to file and serve its initial response to the First Amended Complaint. They

will use that time to discuss the facts and hopefully whether any potential

resolution is possible. In addition, they will use that time in the hopes of

reaching some agreement on the RICO, fraud, and survivorship claims for

relief and thereby avoiding wasting the Court’s resources on a motion to

dismiss and a motion to strike.

STIPULATION

Plaintiffs Barbara Jean Graham, deceased, and Joseph Graham, by

and through their counsel of record, Dooley Herr & Peltzer, LLP, and

Defendant Smiths Medical, by and through its counsel, Bowman and

Brooke LLP, hereby stipulate that Defendant Smiths Medical shall have

an additional 30 days, to and including September 21, 2007, within which

to file and serve its initial response to the Complaint.

 IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: August 24, 2007 DOOLEY HERR & PELTZER, LLP

Case 1:07-cv-00991-LJO-GSA Document 11 Filed 08/24/07 Page 4 of 6
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

L421307 5

RENEW ED AND AMENDED JOINT REQUEST/ REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION AND

STIPULATION OF PARTIES EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE (PER LOCAL RULE

6-144(a)); [PROPOSED] ORDER

 By: /s/ Leonard C. Herr 

 Leonard C. Herr

Attorney for Plaintiffs 

BARBARA JEAN GRAHAM

deceased, JOSEPH GRAHAM

as Executor of the Estate of

Barbara Jean Graham on behalf of

the HEIRS 

DATED: August 24, 2007 BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP

By: /s/ Robert S. Robinson

Robert S. Robinson

Jenny A. Covington

Attorneys for Defendant

SMITHS MEDICAL

[PROPOSED] ORDER

The Court, having read the Renewed and Amended Stipulation

between Plaintiffs Barbara Jean Graham, deceased, and Joseph

Graham, on the one hand, and Defendant Smiths Medical, on the other,

pursuant to Local Rule 6-144(a), for a 30-day extension of the time for

Defendant Smiths Medical to file and serve its initial response to the First

Amended Complaint, and finding good cause therefor, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Smiths Medical shall

have an additional 30 days, to and including September 21, 2007, within

which to file and serve its initial response to the First Amended

Complaint.

Case 1:07-cv-00991-LJO-GSA Document 11 Filed 08/24/07 Page 5 of 6
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

L421307 6

RENEW ED AND AMENDED JOINT REQUEST/ REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION AND

STIPULATION OF PARTIES EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE (PER LOCAL RULE

6-144(a)); [PROPOSED] ORDER

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 24, 2007 

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

The Honorable Lawrence J. O’Neill

 United States District Judge

Case 1:07-cv-00991-LJO-GSA Document 11 Filed 08/24/07 Page 6 of 6