Filed: Apr. 07, 2014
Latest Update: Apr. 07, 2014
Summary: ORDER DAVID G. CAMPBELL, District Judge. Plaintiff Chunhye Lee filed an amended complaint on November 25, 2013, asserting claims against Defendants for retaliation and intimidation in employment. Doc. 6. On February 11, 2014, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's claims as barred by res judicata, but denied Defendants' motions for sanctions. Defendants State of Arizona and Arizona Board of Regents ("ABOR") filed an application for attorney's fees on February 25, 2014, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1988.
Summary: ORDER DAVID G. CAMPBELL, District Judge. Plaintiff Chunhye Lee filed an amended complaint on November 25, 2013, asserting claims against Defendants for retaliation and intimidation in employment. Doc. 6. On February 11, 2014, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's claims as barred by res judicata, but denied Defendants' motions for sanctions. Defendants State of Arizona and Arizona Board of Regents ("ABOR") filed an application for attorney's fees on February 25, 2014, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1988. ..
More
ORDER
DAVID G. CAMPBELL, District Judge.
Plaintiff Chunhye Lee filed an amended complaint on November 25, 2013, asserting claims against Defendants for retaliation and intimidation in employment. Doc. 6. On February 11, 2014, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's claims as barred by res judicata, but denied Defendants' motions for sanctions. Defendants State of Arizona and Arizona Board of Regents ("ABOR") filed an application for attorney's fees on February 25, 2014, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988. Doc. 35. The motion has been fully briefed. Docs. 39, 40.
After Defendants filed this motion, Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit. Doc. 37. "If an appeal on the merits of the case is taken, the [district] court may rule on the claim for fees, may defer its ruling on the motion, or may deny the motion without prejudice, directing under subdivision (d)(2)(B) a new period for filing after the appeal has been resolved." Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d), advisory committee's note (1993 amendments); see also Tancredi v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 378 F.3d 220, 225-26 (2nd Cir. 2004). In the interest of judicial economy, the Court will not rule on Defendants' motion until after the Ninth Circuit has ruled on Plaintiffs' appeal.
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' motion for attorneys' fees (Doc. 35) is denied without prejudice to re-filing within 30 days of the Ninth Circuit's resolution of Plaintiff's appeal.
