Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-01032/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-01032-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Mark Bax
Plaintiff
Memorial Medical Center
Defendant
Sutter Gould Medical Foundation
Defendant
Sutter Health
Defendant
Sutter Health Memorial Medical Center
Defendant
Sutter Valley Hospitals
Defendant
Sutter Valley Medical Foundation
Defendant

Document Text:

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

17781015.1

Case No. 1:21-cv-01032-DAD-SKO

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

EISENBERG & BAUM, LLP

ANDREW ROZYNSKI (appearing pro hac vice)

24 Union Square East, Penthouse

Telephone: (212) 353-8700

Facsimile: (917) 591-2875

Attorneys for Plaintiff

MARK BAX 

HANSON BRIDGETT LLP

KURT A. FRANKLIN, SBN 172715

CELIA L. GUZMAN, SBN 325616

425 Market Street, 26th Floor

San Francisco, California 94105

Telephone: (415) 777-3200

Facsimile: (415) 541-9366

Attorneys for Defendants

SUTTER VALLEY HOSPITALS and SUTTER 

VALLEY MEDICAL FOUNDATION 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO DIVISION

MARK BAX,

Plaintiff,

v.

SUTTER HEALTH and SUTTER HEALTH 

MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:21-cv-01032-DAD-SKO

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR 

EXTENSION TO RESPOND TO 

COMPLAINT

(Doc. 7)

Under Eastern District of California Rule 144, Plaintiff MARK BAX (“Plaintiff”) and 

Defendant SUTTER VALLEY HOSPITALS, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, 

dba Memorial Medical Center (the “Hospital”) and Defendant SUTTER VALLEY MEDICAL 

FOUNDATION, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, dba Sutter Gould Medical 

Foundation (“SVMF”)

1

(referred to jointly as “Defendants”) stipulate to extend Defendants’ time 

to respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint up to and including September 27, 2021. The parties need this 

 

1 Defendants have been incorrectly named and served as “SUTTER HEALTH” and “SUTTER 

HEALTH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER.”

Case 1:21-cv-01032-DJC-SCR Document 8 Filed 08/17/21 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

17781015.1

-2- Case No. 1:21-cv-01032-DAD-SKO

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

additional time to evaluate the claims and defenses, to potentially avoid unnecessary motion work,

and to allow Plaintiff time to amend the Complaint with the correct names of defendant entities. 

This extension of time is Defendants’ first extension.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: August 13, 2021 EISENBERG & BAUM, LLP

By:

 

ANDREW ROZYNSKI

(Appearing Pro Hac Vice)

Attorney for Plaintiff

MARK BAX

DATED: August 13, 2021 HANSON BRIDGETT LLP

By: /s/ Celia L. Guzman

KURT A. FRANKLIN

CELIA L. GUZMAN

Attorneys for Defendants

SUTTER HEALTH and SUTTER HEALTH 

MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER

Case 1:21-cv-01032-DJC-SCR Document 8 Filed 08/17/21 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

17781015.1

-3- Case No. 1:21-cv-01032-DAD-SKO

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

ORDER

Pursuant to the parties’ above stipulation (Doc. 7), and for good cause shown, IT IS 

HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants shall file an answer or otherwise respond to the complaint 

by no later than September 27, 2021.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 16, 2021 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:21-cv-01032-DJC-SCR Document 8 Filed 08/17/21 Page 3 of 3