Blakely v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc., 2:18-cv-01647 WBS EFB. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190816a36
Visitors: 17
Filed: Aug. 14, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 14, 2019
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB , District Judge . Before the court are the parties' filings dated August 12, 2019 and August 13, 2019. (Docket Nos. 18, 20.) The court previously stayed this case, per the parties' agreement, pending the Ninth Circuit's decision in the related case Lindblom v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc. , Case No. 1:15-cv-990 BAM. (Docket No. 16.) That appeal concerned the request by the plaintiffs in this case to permissively intervene in the Lindblom case. The Ninth Circuit ha
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB , District Judge . Before the court are the parties' filings dated August 12, 2019 and August 13, 2019. (Docket Nos. 18, 20.) The court previously stayed this case, per the parties' agreement, pending the Ninth Circuit's decision in the related case Lindblom v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc. , Case No. 1:15-cv-990 BAM. (Docket No. 16.) That appeal concerned the request by the plaintiffs in this case to permissively intervene in the Lindblom case. The Ninth Circuit has..
More
ORDER
WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge.
Before the court are the parties' filings dated August 12, 2019 and August 13, 2019. (Docket Nos. 18, 20.) The court previously stayed this case, per the parties' agreement, pending the Ninth Circuit's decision in the related case Lindblom v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-990 BAM. (Docket No. 16.) That appeal concerned the request by the plaintiffs in this case to permissively intervene in the Lindblom case. The Ninth Circuit has since affirmed the denial of those requests to intervene, as explained by the parties in their recent filings. However, Judge McAuliffe has not decided a motion for leave to substitute as class representative or a motion for leave to intervene as of right, both of which were filed after plaintiffs in this case filed their notice of appeal in Lindblom. (Docket Nos. 156 & 164 in Case No. 1:15-cv-990 BAM.) Because Judge McAuliffe's decisions on those motions could affect proceedings in this case, this case is further STAYED pending resolution of those motions in Lindblom. The parties shall file a joint status report within 14 days after Judge McAuliffe has decided both motions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
