Ferguson v. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
- Yvonne Rogers
- 4:19-cv-05262
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Ferguson v. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Judge Rogers denied Ferguson’s summary-judgment motion without prejudice, reset briefing, and vacated the hearing.
Rollington Ferguson and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; the order denied Ferguson’s summary-judgment motion without prejudice and adjusted the schedule for the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
What happened
In Ferguson v. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the court considered Rollington Ferguson’s motion for summary judgment while the defendant’s motion to dismiss was still pending and before the defendant had answered the complaint.
The court denied Ferguson’s summary-judgment motion without prejudice because it was premature. The court also treated Ferguson’s late opposition to the motion to dismiss as timely because he was representing himself, and allowed the defendant to file a reply by September 8, 2020.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers reset the briefing schedule, vacated the September 8 motion hearing, and said the court would either reset the hearing if necessary or decide the motion without oral argument. The order did not decide the motion to dismiss.
The detailed version
- Ferguson v. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services · No. 4:19-cv-05262
- Yvonne Rogers
- Sept. 1, 2020
Background
Rollington Ferguson, who was representing himself, filed a motion for summary judgment. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services had filed a motion to dismiss Ferguson’s complaint, and Ferguson filed an opposition to that motion.
Rulings
The court denied Ferguson’s motion for summary judgment without prejudice. It concluded that the motion was premature because the defendant had not yet answered the complaint and the court was still considering the motion to dismiss.
Ferguson’s opposition to the motion to dismiss was filed after the deadline in the local rules. Because Ferguson was representing himself, the court deemed the opposition timely. It reset the briefing schedule and allowed the defendant to file a reply by September 8, 2020.
The court also vacated the motion hearing scheduled for September 8, 2020. It stated that it would reset the hearing if necessary or otherwise decide the motion without oral argument. The order terminated the docket entry for Ferguson’s summary-judgment motion. It did not rule on the merits of the motion to dismiss.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.