Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01361/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01361-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 380
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Property Damage
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Property Damage

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALFRED AGUIRRE,

Plaintiff,

v.

OMNI FAMILY HEALTH,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:24-cv-01361-KES-CDB

ORDER ON STIPULATION EXTENDING 

TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO 

COMPLAINT

(Doc. 7)

ORDER VACATING FEBRUARY 5, 2025, 

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

Relevant Background

On November 6, 2024, Plaintiff Alfred Aguirre (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action with the 

filing of a complaint on behalf of himself and a putative class of others against Defendant Omni 

Family Health (“Defendant”). (Doc. 1). On December 10, 2024, the parties stipulated pursuant 

to Local Rule 144(a) to extend by 28 days the time for Defendant to respond to the complaint, 

up to and including January 10, 2025. (Doc. 4). On January 8, 2025, Defendant filed the Notice 

of Related Cases and identified as related several actions, including at the time 13 cases before

this Court, eight cases before the Kern County Superior Court, and one case before the Fresno 

County Superior Court.1 (Doc. 6 at 1-3). Defendant therein advised it intends to remove all the 

1 The Court notes two of the identified Omni actions were voluntarily dismissed. See Brandon 

Cubit v. Omni Family Health, No. 1:24-cv-01491-KES-CDB (Doc. 5) & Katrina Hernandez 

individually and as next friend on behalf of S.A. (minor) v. Omni Family Health, Superior Court of 

Case 1:24-cv-01361-KES-CDB Document 8 Filed 01/13/25 Page 1 of 3
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

state actions pending in the Superior Courts of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). (Id.

at 3). Defendant attests that it has either been served or waived service in all the cases identified 

aside from three of the state actions. (Id.).

This action is one of several similar class action suits brought in or removed to this Court 

in which plaintiffs assert similar claims against Defendant. See, e.g., Gober Villatoro Guerra v. 

Omni Family Health, Case No. 1:24-cv-01492-JLT-CDB (“Guerra”) (Doc. 6). In Guerra, the 

Court noted the class action complaints here and the other Omni actions allege substantially 

similar facts and nearly identical causes of action against Defendant. (Id. at 1-2) (“From review 

of the several complaints, it appears these actions arise from a recent, alleged cyberattack 

resulting in a data breach of sensitive information in the possession and custody and/or control 

of Defendant (the ‘Data Breach’).”).

The Court ordered Defendant to file a Notice of Related Cases in accordance with Local 

Rule 123(b) in Guerra and the identified Omni actions therein, including the instant action. (Id.

at 3). The Court further ordered the parties in Guerra to show cause why this action should or 

should not be consolidated pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a). (Id.). On 

December 27, 2024, Defendant filed the Notice of Related Cases and identified as related, inter 

alia, the instant action. (Guerra, Doc. 8); see (Doc. 6). On December 30, 2024, the parties in 

Guerra filed a joint status report in response to the Court’s show cause order. (Guerra, Doc. 9). 

Therein, Defendant represents it intends to file a motion to substitute the United States in the 

matter and all other related Omni matters. (Id. at 1).

The Guerra parties represent that they will file in the first filed of the Omni federal 

actions – Ellen Pace v. Omni Family Health, Case No. 1:24-cv-01277-JLT-CDB – a joint 

stipulation and proposed order consolidating and staying the Omni actions pending resolution of 

the earlier of Defendant’s forthcoming motion to substitute or motions to remand in Abraham, 

et al. v. Omni Family Health, Case No. 1:24-cv-01456-CDB (“Abraham”) (Abraham, Doc. 7) as 

well as Scott Stevenson and Marcos Mantoya v. Omni Family Health, No. 1:24-cv-01459-CDB 

(“Stevenson”) (Stevenson, Doc. 11). (Id. at 2). 

the State of California, County of Kern, Case No. BCV-24-103697 (dismissed on Dec. 23, 2024).

Case 1:24-cv-01361-KES-CDB Document 8 Filed 01/13/25 Page 2 of 3
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

3

Pending Stipulated Request

Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulated request to extend by 30 additional days 

the time for Defendant to respond to the complaint, through and including February 10, 2025, 

filed on January 8, 2025. (Doc. 7). The parties represent the requested extension will allow time 

for (a) other federal court actions filed against Defendant to be consolidated and (b) the Court to 

rule upon Defendant’s forthcoming motion to substitute the United States in this case as a 

defendant pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 42 U.S.C. § 233. (Doc. 7 at 2). The parties 

represent that good cause exists to grant the requested extension in the efficiencies from allowing 

consolidation to occur and ruling on the pending motions to substitute. (Id.).

Conclusion and Order

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. Defendant shall have until February 10, 2025, to respond to the complaint by filing 

an answer or other responsive pleading. See Local Rule 144(a); and

2. The scheduling conference set for February 5, 2025 (Doc. 3) is VACATED to be 

reset as necessary following ruling on the pending motions to remand in Stevenson

and Abraham and resolution of the issue of consolidation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 13, 2025 ___________________ _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:24-cv-01361-KES-CDB Document 8 Filed 01/13/25 Page 3 of 3