Leticia Castaon Garcia v. St. Mary's Medical Center

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MARTHA LETICIA CASTANON Case No. 24-cv-00058-VC (TSH) GARCIA, et al., 11 Plaintiffs, DISCOVERY ORDER 12 v. Re: Dkt. No. 109 13 ST. MARY'S MEDICAL CENTER, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Defendant Katherine Tran has a theory. She observes that in the Complaint, First 17 Amended Complaint and Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs allege that “[a] timely Notice of 18 Intent to Sue letter was submitted to St. Mary’s Medical Center regarding the conduct of 19 Defendant Katerine Tran.” ECF Nos. 1 ¶ 16 (Complaint), 26 ¶ 16 (FAC), 85 ¶ 18 (SAC). If that 20 unchanging allegation is true, she thinks the notice was defective because it was supposed to be 21 sent to a different address, and therefore (she believes) the claim against her is time-barred. 22 Imagine her surprise when she received in discovery a picture of a purportedly timely notice of 23 intent to sue (ECF No. 110, .pdf page 14) accompanied by a proof of service that listed what she 24 claims is her correct mailing address (id.,…