Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Siegler v. Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. California

September 18, 2019

SARA ELIZABETH SIEGLER, et al. Plaintiffs,
v.
SORRENTO THERAPEUTICS, INC., et al., Defendants.

          ORDER (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO APPEAR REMOTELY AT THE UPCOMING HEARING; (2) GRANTING MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION TO FILE A REPLY; AND (3) SCHEDULING HEARING ON PENDING MOTIONS. [ECF NOS. 134, 140, 142.]

          Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel, United States District Judge.

         On August 2, 2019, the Court granted Defendants BDL Products, Inc., Cargenix Holdings LLC, Henry Ji, Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc., and TNK Therapeutics, Inc.’s (“Defendants”) motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, ECF No. 126, and entered judgement against Plaintiff Sara Elizabeth Siegler (“Plaintiff”), ECF No. 127. The dismissal order and judgment have spawned numerous follow-up motions aiming to have the Court reconsider its August 2, 2019 ruling and seeking other forms of relief including a change of venue, permission to exceed page limitations, an extension of motion deadlines, and the Court’s recusal or disqualification. ECF Nos. 128, 133, 134, 138, 140, 142. With the most recent orders, see ECF Nos. 132, 135, 141, the Court has ruled on the requests and motions set out in ECF Nos. 128, 133, and 138.

         Plaintiff’s remaining motions and requests, contained in ECF Nos. 134, 140, and 142, are described below. On August 30, 2019, Plaintiff requested reconsideration of the order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss and the entry of clerk’s judgment. ECF No. 134. On September 6, 2019, the Court scheduled a hearing on this motion for November 15, 2019. ECF No. 139. The Court directed a response be filed on or before October 4, 2019 and a reply on or before October 15, 2019. ECF No. 139. On September 7, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion to appear remotely at the upcoming hearing and to extend the time permitted to file a reply. ECF No. 140-1. Thereafter, on September 10, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for recusal and/or disqualification. ECF No. 142.

         I. Plaintiff’s Motion to Appear Remotely with Written Instructions

         Plaintiff requests leave to participate remotely if a hearing is held on the pending motions. See ECF No. 140. Plaintiff offers that she is “unable to fly to California for the purposes of a hearing.” ECF No. 140-1 at 1.

         Permitting a party’s remote appearance “is within the sole discretion of the Court.” Mohammadkhani v. Anthony, No. CVS-02-0095-KJD-LRL, 2007 WL 2325162, at *3 (D. Nev. Aug. 10, 2007). Similarly, it is in the Court’s discretion whether to hold a hearing or to decide the motions on the papers. See CivLR 7(d)(1). Here, upon good cause showing, and in light of Plaintiff’s circumstances, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion and permits Plaintiff to appear remotely if a hearing on the pending motions is held.

         Plaintiff also requests that the Court provide written instructions on how to appear remotely at least one week prior to the hearing date. ECF No. 140-1 at 8. Plaintiff shall contact the undersigned’s courtroom deputy clerk at (619) 557-5539 at least two (2) days prior to the hearing to make appropriate arrangements for an appearance via telephone. Cf. Johnson v. Mitchell, No. 2:10-CV-1968 GEB GGH, 2012 WL 2446098, at *8 (E.D. Cal. June 26, 2012) (requiring party to call deputy clerk to obtain instructions for a telephonic appearance).

         II. Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Time to File Reply

         The Court also GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to extend time permitted to file a reply and orders a reply due December 6, 2019. As a result, the Court reschedules the hearing on the pending motion for reconsideration of the judgment from November 15, 2019 to December 20, 2019 at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 2D. See ECF No. 134. Finally, the Court sets a concurrent hearing on the Plaintiff’s motion for recusal and disqualification for December 20, 2019. See ECF No. 142. A response to both motions should be filed on or before October 18, 2019 and any reply should be filed on or before December 6, 2019.

         III. Conclusion

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. A hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Order Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and the Entry of Clerk’s Judgment, ECF No. 134, and Plaintiff’s Motion for Recusal and Disqualification, ECF No. 142, is scheduled on December 20, 2019 at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 2D.
2. The scheduled November 15, 2019 hearing is continued to December 20, 2019.
3. In the event that a hearing is held on December 20, 2019, Plaintiff may ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.