Fraser v. Team Health Holdings, Inc.

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SIA FRASER, et al., Case No. 20-cv-04600-JSW 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER VACATING HEARING AND 9 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 10 TEAM HEALTH HOLDINGS, INC., et al., Re: Dkt. No. 51 Defendants.

13 This matter is scheduled for a hearing on April 23, 2021 to consider Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint. The Court has considered the parties’ papers, relevant legal authority, and the record in this case, and it finds the motion suitable for disposition without oral argument. Accordingly, it VACATES the hearing.

17 Plaintiffs have asserted a RICO claim, and allege venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. sections 1391(b) and (c) and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1965(a). The only connection to this District is that one of the alleged members of the RICO enterprise, TeamHealth West, which owns the provider group that provided care to Plaintiff Sia Fraser, is located in Pleasanton, California.

21 None of the Plaintiffs and none of the named Defendants reside within this District. While venue may be proper, the Court ORDERS the parties to show cause why this case should not be transferred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1404(a). See Costlow v. Weeks, 790 F.2d 1486, 1488 (9th Cir. 1998) (Courts may “transfer a case sua sponte under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, as codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), so long as the parties are first given the opportunity to present their views on the issue.”).

27 The parties shall file their responses on May 3, 2021, which shall not exceed ten (10) ] exceed ten (10) pages. Once those responses are on file, the Court will deem the matter submitted || and issue written ruling.

3 IT ISSO ORDERED. “| || Dated: April 19, 2021 / } Nite / / 5 \ / JEFFREW §. WHI 6 /United ptates Disfict Judge / 1]

Oo Z 18