Opinion
2:22-cv-02147 WBS AC 2:22-cv-02147 WBS AC
04-11-2023
TRACY H0EG, M.D., Ph.D.; RAM DURISETI, M.D., Ph.D.; AARON KHERIATY, M.D.; PETE MAZOLEWSKI, M.D.; and AZADEH KHATIBI, M.D., M.S., M.P.H., Plaintiffs, v. GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor of the State of California, in his official capacity; KRISTINA LAWSON, President of the Medical Board of California, in her official capacity; RANDY HAWKINS, M.D., Vice President of the Medical Board of California, in his official capacity; LAURIE ROSE LUBIANO, Secretary of the Medical Board of California, in her official capacity; MICHELLE ANNE BHOLAT, M.D., M.P.H., DAVID E. RYU, RYAN BROOKS, JAMES M. HEALZER, M.D., ASIF MAHMOOD, M.D., NICOLE A. JEONG, RICHARD E. THORP, M.D., VELING TSAI, M.D., and ESERICK WATKINS, members of the Medical Board of California, in their official in his official capacity; Defendants. LETRINH HOANG, D.O.; PHYSICIANS FOR INFORMED CONSENT, a not-for profit organization; and CHILDREN'S HEALTH DEFENSE, CALIFORNIA CHAPTER, a California Nonprofit Corporation; Plaintiffs, v. ROB BONTA, in his official capacity as Attorney General of California; and ERIKA CALDERON, in her official capacity as Executive Officer of the Osteopathic Medical Board of California; Defendants.
ORDER
WILLIAM B. SHUBB UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
These related matters were set for scheduling conferences on April 10, 2023. While the parties in both cases submitted Joint Status Reports, they did not propose any dates. Rather, defendants argued that the case should be stayed pending the outcome of the appeal in McDonald v. Lawson, No. 22-56220 (9th Cir.). Plaintiffs argued that a stay was not necessary and the cases should proceed to motions for summary judgment. McDonald is fully briefed and will be heard in July, August, or September 2023, according to the parties. The parties estimated that the Ninth Circuit will issue a decision by the end of 2023.
The court credits defendants' argument that the proceedings in these cases will likely be informed by the outcome of that appeal. Nevertheless, the court has a duty to move cases -- particularly those of great public importance - toward disposition, rather than delaying them indefinitely. Balancing these competing concerns, the court declines to stay these actions at this time but orders that no dispositive motion shall be noticed for hearing on a date prior to January 1, 2024, or until the Ninth Circuit issues a decision in the McDonald appeal, whichever shall occur first. This Order shall be subject to modification upon the application of any party for good cause shown.
Pursuant to the court's prior orders (H0eg Docket No. 4; Hoang Docket No. 3) and Local Rule 240, the parties shall submit to the court Joint Status Reports for purposes of scheduling no later than fourteen days from the date of this Order, with proposed dates and deadlines, including trial, taking the restrictions of this Order into account.
IT IS SO ORDERED.