LAMBETH MAGNETIC STRUCTURES, LLC v. TOSHIBA CORPORATION, 14-1526. (2015)
Court: District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20151105f02
Visitors: 12
Filed: Nov. 04, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 04, 2015
Summary: ORDER CATHY BISSOON , District Judge . The parties' Joint Motion to Stay Deadlines (Doc. 55) is GRANTED as follows: This case hereby is STAYED pending ongoing mediation efforts. For the duration of the stay, this case is and shall remain ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED . Administrative closings comprise a familiar way in which courts remove cases from their active files without final adjudication. Penn West Assocs., Inc. v. Cohen , 371 F.3d 118 , 127 (3d Cir. 2004) (citation and internal quot
Summary: ORDER CATHY BISSOON , District Judge . The parties' Joint Motion to Stay Deadlines (Doc. 55) is GRANTED as follows: This case hereby is STAYED pending ongoing mediation efforts. For the duration of the stay, this case is and shall remain ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED . Administrative closings comprise a familiar way in which courts remove cases from their active files without final adjudication. Penn West Assocs., Inc. v. Cohen , 371 F.3d 118 , 127 (3d Cir. 2004) (citation and internal quota..
More
ORDER
CATHY BISSOON, District Judge.
The parties' Joint Motion to Stay Deadlines (Doc. 55) is GRANTED as follows: This case hereby is STAYED pending ongoing mediation efforts. For the duration of the stay, this case is and shall remain ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED. Administrative closings comprise a familiar way in which courts remove cases from their active files without final adjudication. Penn West Assocs., Inc. v. Cohen, 371 F.3d 118, 127 (3d Cir. 2004) (citation and internal quotations omitted). Administrative closure is a docket control device used by the Court for statistical purposes, and it does not prejudice the rights of the parties in any manner. Honig v. Comcast of Georgia I, LLC, 537 F.Supp.2d 1277, 1290 n.8 (N.D. Ga. 2008).
As and when appropriate, any party may restore this action to the Court's active calendar upon application or by motion. See In re Arbitration Between Philadelphia Elec. Co. v. Nuclear Elec. Ins., Ltd., 845 F.Supp. 1026, 1028 (S.D.N.Y. 1994) (holding same).
Consistent with the foregoing, the parties' pending motions (Docs. 45, 48) are DENIED without prejudice to refiling, if appropriate, should the case be reopened.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
