Rael v. The Children's Place, Inc., 3:16-cv-00370-GPC-JMA. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20180611631
Visitors: 14
Filed: Jun. 08, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 08, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING AS MOOT MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT [DKT. NO. 36] GONZALO P. CURIEL , District Judge . On February 8, 2018, this Court held a hearing regarding plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of settlement. Dkt. No. 42. The Court directed the parties to submit an amended motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. Dkt. No. 42. On March 9, 2018, Defendant the Children's Place, Inc. and Plaintiffs (the "Parties") filed a joint status report stating that the
Summary: ORDER DENYING AS MOOT MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT [DKT. NO. 36] GONZALO P. CURIEL , District Judge . On February 8, 2018, this Court held a hearing regarding plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of settlement. Dkt. No. 42. The Court directed the parties to submit an amended motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. Dkt. No. 42. On March 9, 2018, Defendant the Children's Place, Inc. and Plaintiffs (the "Parties") filed a joint status report stating that the ..
More
ORDER DENYING AS MOOT MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT
[DKT. NO. 36]
GONZALO P. CURIEL, District Judge.
On February 8, 2018, this Court held a hearing regarding plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of settlement. Dkt. No. 42. The Court directed the parties to submit an amended motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. Dkt. No. 42. On March 9, 2018, Defendant the Children's Place, Inc. and Plaintiffs (the "Parties") filed a joint status report stating that the upcoming filing would address a "recent Ninth Circuit decision regarding settlement approval." Dkt. No. 44. On March 30, 2018, the parties submitted a joint status update to address the recent Ninth Circuit decision in In re Hyundai & Kia Fuel Economy Litigation, 881 F.3d 679 (9th Cir. 2018). On April 2, 2018, the Court stayed this action pending resolution of the petition for rehearing en banc in Hyundai.
The parties have indicated that they will be resubmitting a motion for preliminary approval of settlement once the stay in this case is lifted. Accordingly, the Court DENIES AS MOOT the operative preliminary motion for settlement (Dkt. No. 36).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
