Bryant Vineyards Ltd. v. Ridenhour, 19-cv-04363-EMC. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20191107b15
Visitors: 10
Filed: Nov. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO STAY Docket No. 46 EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . The Winery has filed an ex parte application for a stay of this Court's transfer order. As the Winery acknowledges, "where a party seeks to stay a district court proceeding pending the resolution of another action," the party is asking for a Landis stay. Lal v. Capital One Fin. Corp., No. 16-cv-06674-BLF, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9121, at *3-4 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2017); see also Landis
Summary: ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO STAY Docket No. 46 EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . The Winery has filed an ex parte application for a stay of this Court's transfer order. As the Winery acknowledges, "where a party seeks to stay a district court proceeding pending the resolution of another action," the party is asking for a Landis stay. Lal v. Capital One Fin. Corp., No. 16-cv-06674-BLF, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9121, at *3-4 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2017); see also Landis v..
More
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO STAY
Docket No. 46
EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.
The Winery has filed an ex parte application for a stay of this Court's transfer order. As the Winery acknowledges, "where a party seeks to stay a district court proceeding pending the resolution of another action," the party is asking for a Landis stay. Lal v. Capital One Fin. Corp., No. 16-cv-06674-BLF, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9121, at *3-4 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2017); see also Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248 (1936). In the exercise of its discretion, see Lockyer v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1109 (9th Cir. 2005) (noting that "[a] district court has discretionary power to stay proceedings in its own court under Landis"), the ex parte application is DENIED.
This order disposes of Docket No. 46.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
