Borrayo

I.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The facts alleged in plaintiff’s underlying medical negligence action are described in this court’s previous opinion and need not be repeated in detail here. In essence, plaintiff filed a complaint alleging defendant was negligent in treating her thoracic outlet syndrome. (Borrayo I, supra, 2 Cal.App.5th at pp. 307–308.) Before trial, defendant moved for summary judgment. In opposition to the motion, plaintiff submitted a declaration of Dr. Abraham Castrejon Pineda, a physician practicing in Mexico. Defendant objected to

2 the declaration of Dr. Castrejon Pineda on the basis he had failed to establish he was sufficiently familiar with the standard of care in the United States. (Ibid.) The trial court sustained the objection and granted the motion. (Id. at pp. 308–309.) On appeal, we reversed, concluding that defendant’s “locality objection” to plaintiff’s expert declaration should not have been granted. (Id. at p. 314.) The remittitur was filed in the trial court on October 19, 2016, which triggered the three-year deadline under section 583.320, subdivision (a)(3) to bring the case to trial. On November 3, 2016, defense counsel advised…