ORDER

B. LYNN WINMILL, Chief District Judge.

The Court has earlier denied defendants' motion to stay the unwinding of the Saltzer deal. In response, the defendants have now filed a much more limited motion for stay, seeking to stay the unwinding of the Saltzer deal only until the Ninth Circuit can rule upon the emergency motion for stay filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 8(a)(2). Any such stay should last just a month or so, until the Ninth Circuit can rule on the emergency motion.

The plaintiffs do not object to a stay as long as it lasts no longer than 30 days. That would typically be sufficient to allow the Ninth Circuit to rule on the motion for stay. But a 30-day deadline would put inappropriate pressure on the Ninth Circuit to resolve the motion within that deadline, and the Court declines to take that approach. Instead, the Court will issue a stay to remain in effect until the Ninth Circuit resolves the motion to stay, a date that will most likely be close to the plaintiffs' suggested deadline. In making this decision, the Court is not reconsidering in any way its earlier decision — this stay is much more limited in scope and is driven in large part by the plaintiffs' agreement to a 30-day stay. Accordingly,

NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the motion for stay (docket no. 507) is GRANTED. The Court's order that St. Luke's unwind the Saltzer transaction is stayed pending the Ninth Circuit's resolution of St. Luke's emergency motion for stay under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 8(a)(2).