Jobe v. Community Medical Centers ( 2021 )

1 Teresa C. Chow, Esq. (SBN 237694) tchow@bakerlaw.com 2 BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 11601 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1400 3 Los Angeles, CA 90025-0509 Telephone: 310.820.8800 4 Facsimile: 310.820.8859 5 Attorneys for Defendant FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL 6 CENTER d/b/a/ COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS 7 (Additional Counsel Listed on Next Page) 8 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 RAGINA BELL, individually and Case No.: 2:20-cv-02500-WBS-DS on behalf of all other 13 similarly situated, FURTHER STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO 14 Plaintiff, PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED CLASS 15 ACTION COMPLAINT v. 16 Current Response Due:06/18/2021 COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS; New Response Due: 07/09/2021 17 and DOES 1-100, Inclusive, Action Filed: 10/27/2020 Removal Date: 12/17/2020 18 Defendants. FAC Filed: 04/20/2021 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Zachary M. Crosner, Esq. (SBN 272295) zach@crosnerlegal.com 2 Blake R. Jones (SBN 211221) blake@crosnerlegal.com 3 Michael R. Crosner (SBN 41299) mike@crosnerlegal.com 4 CROSNER LEGAL, P.C. 9440 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 301 5 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Telephone: 310.496.5818 6 Facsimile: 310.510.6429 7 Abbas Kazerounian, Esq. (SBN 249203) ak@kazlg.com 8 Mona Amini, Esq. (SBN 296829) mona@kazlg.com 9 KAZEROUNIAN LAW GROUP, APC 245 Fischer Avenue, Unit D1 10 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Telephone: 800.400.6808 11 Facsimile: 800.520.5523 12 Attorneys for Plaintiff RAGINA BELL 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between RAGINA 2 BELL (“Plaintiff”) and FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL 3 CENTER d/b/a/ COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS (“Community Medical 4 Centers,” and together with Plaintiff, the “Parties”), by and 5 through their respective attorneys, and subject to Court 6 approval, that (1) the Parties agree to provide the Court with an 7 update regarding the status of this case’s potential inclusion 8 within the pending multi-district litigation against former 9 defendant Blackbaud, Inc. (“Blackbaud”), as further described 10 below, on or before June 25, 2021; and (2) Community Medical 11 Centers shall have a further extension of time to respond to 12 Plaintiff’s First Amended Class Action Complaint (“FAC”), up to 13 and including July 9, 2021. 14 Whereas, Plaintiff’s FAC alleges that on or around September 15 11, 2020, defendant Community Medical Centers notified 16 approximately 43,667 individuals regarding a data security 17 incident at a third-party vendor named Blackbaud (see First Am. 18 Compl. ¶¶ 17, 36); 19 Whereas, numerous cases were filed against Blackbaud in 20 federal court over the Blackbaud incident, which the Judicial 21 Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated for pretrial 22 proceedings in the United States District Court for the District 23 of South Carolina on December 15, 2020, see In re Blackbaud, 24 Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, --- F. Supp. 3d - 25 ---, 2020 WL 7382276, at *1-2 (J.P.M.L. Dec. 15, 2020) (the “In 26 re Blackbaud MDL”); 27 Whereas, plaintiffs’ Liaison Counsel in the In re Blackbaud 28 MDL recently tagged two pending California district court cases 1 for inclusion in that multidistrict litigation, even though 2 Blackbaud was no longer a party to those cases, see Ex. A, Case 3 Mang’t Ord. No. 9 (Summary of Case Mang’t Conf. No. 4) at pg. 1 4 (discussing Mesa et al. v. Enloe Med. Center (E.D. Cal., No. 5 2:20-cv-2483) and Doe v. Rady Children’s Hospital-San Diego et 6 al. (S.D. Cal., No. 3:21-cv-00114)); 7 Whereas, based on statements made at the last case 8 management conference in the In re Blackbaud MDL, the undersigned 9 counsel believe that plaintiffs’ Liaison Counsel therein intend 10 to notice this case for tag-along status in the In re Blackbaud 11 MDL as well, but have not done so as of this filing, id.; 12 Whereas, the actions against other third-party Blackbaud 13 customers in the In re Blackbaud MDL are presently stayed until 14 July 29, 2021, see Ex. B, Case Mang’t Ord. No. 8 (Summary of Case 15 Mang’t Conf. No. 8) at pg. 1, and there is currently a mediation 16 scheduled for early-October 2021, see Ex. A at pg. 2; 17 Whereas, based on the above procedural status of the In re 18 Blackbaud MDL, the undersigned counsel have conferred, and 19 jointly agree that it would be most efficient for the Parties and 20 for the Court to extend Community Medical Centers’ deadline for 21 filing a motion to dismiss the FAC for an additional twenty-one 22 days (21) days, up to and including July 9, 2021, to avoid 23 potentially unnecessary motion to dismiss filings before this 24 Court; 25 Whereas, the Parties previously stipulated to, and the Court 26 approved, an extension of time for Community Medical Centers to 27 respond to the FAC from May 31, 2021 up to and including the 28 current deadline of June 18, 2021 (Dkt. 12); 1 Whereas, the further extension stipulated to herein will not 2 impact any dates set by the Court; and 3 Whereas, the Parties further agree to provide the Court with 4 a status update on this case’s potential inclusion within the In 5 re Blackbaud MDL on or before June 25, 2021; 6 Based on the facts above and the Parties’ agreement, it is 7 hereby stipulated pursuant to Eastern District of California 8 Local Rule 144, and subject to Court approval, that the Parties 9 shall provide the Court with a status update on this case’s 10 potential inclusion within the In re Blackbaud MDL on or before 11 June 25, 2021, and Community Medical Centers may have up to and 12 including July 9, 2021 to respond to the FAC. 13 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 14 Dated: June 16, 2021 BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 15 By: /s/ Teresa C. Chow 16 Teresa C. Chow 17 Attorneys for Defendant FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND 18 MEDICAL CENTER d/b/a/ COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS 19 20 Dated: June 16, 2021 CROSNER LEGAL, P.C. 21 22 /s/ Chad A. Saunders 23 By: (as authorized on June 16, 2021) Zachary M. Crosner, Esq. 24 Blake R. Jones, Esq. Chad A. Saunders, Esq. 25 M ichael R. Crosner, Esq. 26 Attorneys for Plaintiff RAGINA BELL 27 28 eee eee I IEE I IRE EINE IIR IO OIE IE IGE GES IS) II EO NE 1 ORDER 2 The Court, having read and considered the Parties’ Further 3 Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Plaintiff’s First || amended Class Action Complaint, and for good cause appearing, 5 HEREBY ORDERS that Community Medical Centers may have up to and 6 including July 9, 2021 to respond to the FAC. The Parties shall 7 provide the Court with a status update on this case’s potential 8 inclusion within the In re Blackbaud MDL on or before June 25, 2021. 10 1] IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 . 2 13] pated: June 17, 2021 □□ tteom. Ad. bt—~ 14 WILLIAM B. SHUBB UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 18 - Order FURTHER STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO