Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01492/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01492-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gober Villatoro Guerra
Plaintiff
Omni Family Health
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GOBER VILLATORO GUERRA,

Plaintiff,

v.

OMNI FAMILY HEALTH,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:24-cv-01492-JLT-CDB

ORDER ON STIPULATION FURTHER 

EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO 

RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

(Doc. 10)

ORDER VACATING MARCH 12, 2025, 

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

Relevant Background

On November 4, 2024, Plaintiff Gober Villatoro Guerra (“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”) in the Superior Court of the State of California, 

Kern County, entitled Gober Villatoro Guerra v. Omni Family Health, Case No. BCV-24-

103780. (Doc. 1). On December 6, 2024, Defendant removed the action to this Court. (Id.). 

On December 9, 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. 

5).

On December 16, 2024, the Court ordered Defendant to show cause why this action 

should not be consolidated with other class actions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

Case 1:24-cv-01492-JLT-CDB Document 11 Filed 01/10/25 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

42(a). (Doc. 6). The Court noted that this action is one of several similar class action suits 

brought in or removed to this Court in which plaintiffs allege substantially similar facts and 

nearly identical claims 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 directed Defendant to file a Notice of Related Cases in accordance with 

Local Rule 123(b) in the instant action and the identified Omni actions therein. (Id. at 3). 

On December 27, 2024, 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. 8 

at 1-3). Defendant therein advised it intends to remove all the 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.).

On December 30, 2024, the parties filed a joint status report in response to the Court’s 

show cause order. (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

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).

Pending Stipulated Request

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) & Katarina Hernandez 

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

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

Case 1:24-cv-01492-JLT-CDB Document 11 Filed 01/10/25 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 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. 10). The parties represent the requested extension will allow 

time for: (a) other federal court actions filed against Defendant to be consolidated; (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; and (c) the Court to rule 

upon the pending motions to remand. (Doc. 10 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 and to remand. (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 March 12, 2025 (Doc. 4) 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 10, 2025 ___________________ _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:24-cv-01492-JLT-CDB Document 11 Filed 01/10/25 Page 3 of 3