Bioscience Advisors, Inc. v. United States Securities and Exchange Commission
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:21-cv-00866
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Bioscience Advisors v. Securities and Exchange Commission, Judge Gilliam changed deadlines for the parties’ summary-judgment filings.
The order affected Bioscience Advisors, Inc. and the defendants by changing the deadlines for the administrative record, summary-judgment briefing, and related filings.
What happened
Bioscience Advisors, Inc. v. United States Securities and Exchange Commission involved the parties’ agreed request to extend deadlines for the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and related filings. The defendants said delays in preparing the motion and administrative record resulted from the variety of claims and the volume of Freedom of Information Act requests.
The parties agreed to move the defendants’ filing deadline from May 17 to May 24, 2022. They also agreed that Bioscience Advisors would file its response by June 22 and that the defendants would file their reply by July 13. They were not requesting a change to the July 28 hearing date.
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. ordered the requested deadlines. The order addressed scheduling only and did not decide the parties’ underlying claims or the summary-judgment motion.
The detailed version
- Bioscience Advisors, Inc. v. United States Securities and Exchange Commission · No. 4:21-cv-00866
- Haywood Gilliam
- May 16, 2022
Background
The parties submitted a stipulation asking the court to extend the deadlines in the court’s March 21, 2022 scheduling order. The defendants’ administrative record and motion for summary judgment were originally due May 17, 2022. The defendants represented that they had experienced delays in preparing those materials because of the variety of claims and the volume of Freedom of Information Act requests involved in the litigation. Bioscience Advisors agreed to the requested extension.
The parties requested a one-week extension for the defendants’ filing and corresponding extensions for the response and reply. They stated that they were not seeking to continue the hearing, scheduled for July 28, 2022, unless the court considered a continuance necessary or desirable. They also stated that they had not previously sought or received an extension of the scheduling-order deadlines.
Order
The court ordered that the defendant file the administrative record and motion for summary judgment by May 24, 2022; that the plaintiff file its opposition by June 22, 2022; and that the defendant file its reply by July 13, 2022. The order did not rule on the merits of the claims or the summary-judgment motion.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.