Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-03473/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-03473-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 362
Nature of Suit: Medical Malpractice
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Medical Malpractice

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GREGG HANSEN,

Plaintiff,

v.

MARIN GENERAL HOSPITAL, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-03473-WHO 

ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO 

RECONSIDER OR CLARIFY

Defendants Dr. Levy and Dr. Estilo request leave to file a motion reconsideration, or in the 

alternative, for clarification of my recent Order granting in part and denying in part their and other 

defendants’ motions to dismiss. Dkt. No. 137. This group of defendants argue that my prior 

Order should be modified to: (i) require Hansen to remove any time-barred allegations (i.e., claims 

arising before April 4, 2016) in his Fourth Amended Complaint, so that defendants do not need to 

move to strike them and otherwise know how to craft their eventual answer; (ii) grant the motion 

to dismiss as to Dr. Estilo with prejudice or leave to amend with Hansen being required to include 

in his Fourth Amended Complaint (as opposed to his exhibits) a description of the specific nontime-barred claims against Estilo1

; and (iii) confirm or clarify these defendants have a right to 

move to dismiss against the medical malpractice claims if Hansen amends those claims with 

respect to Drs. Levy and Estilo in his Fourth Amended Complaint.

The motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration is DENIED but the request for 

clarification is GRANTED to the following extent:

 

1 These defendants complain with cause that because in prior orders I directed Hansen to not rely 

on exhibits but include his allegations in the body of the complaint, they did not expect my

September 24, 2018 Order to go outside the body of the Third Amended Complaint (TAC) and 

rely on material from the exhibits.

Case 3:17-cv-03473-WHO Document 138 Filed 10/05/18 Page 1 of 2
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

If Hansen files a Fourth Amended Complaint (which is due by Monday, October 15, 

2018), Estilo may move to dismiss the medical malpractice claim asserted in the TAC2as well as 

against any additional, specifically identified incidents of medical malpractice Hansen includes in 

the Fourth Amended Complaint that occurred on or after April 4, 2016. Similarly, if Hansen 

alleges in his Fourth Amended Complaint new, specifically identified incidents of medical 

malpractice that occurred on or after April 4, 2016 against Dr. Levy, Levy made move to dismiss 

those new claims as well.

If, however, Hansen does not file a Fourth Amended Complaint, as with the 

ADA/discrimination claim as clarified against Dr. Levy and MGH, Estilo may move to dismiss 

the medical malpractice claims as clarified in the September 24, 2018 Order by Monday 

November 5, 2018. 

As to the time-barred claims, no further relief is warranted. I have made it clear that no

medical malpractice claims can be stated for incidents that occurred prior to April 4, 2016. It 

would be helpful, if Hansen files a Fourth Amended Complaint, for Hansen to omit the timebarred claims from that amended pleading. However, Hansen is proceeding pro se and requiring 

him to comply with additional steps (or setting up grounds for more defense motions) that will not 

help move this case to a ruling on its merits is not useful. Hansen will not be allowed to proceed 

with time-barred claims and defendants will be able to craft their eventual answer accordingly. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 4, 2018

William H. Orrick

United States District Judge

 

2 Those claims, as noted in the September 24, 2018 Order are based on allegations at ECF pgs. 34

and 66 in the exhibits to the TAC.

Case 3:17-cv-03473-WHO Document 138 Filed 10/05/18 Page 2 of 2