Mitri v. Walgreen Co.

Filing 140

ORDER on Request for Case Management Conference re Ninth Circuit Order (Docs. 138 , 139 ) Signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 4/11/2014. (Arellano, S.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

SAMI MITRI,

13
14
15

CASE NO. 1:10-CV-538 AWI SKO
Plaintiff

v.
WALGREEN COMPANY,

ORDER ON REQUEST FOR CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Defendant

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Following a jury trial and various post-trial motions, the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part,
reversed in part, and remanded this matter to this Court on April 1, 2014. See Doc. No. 138. The
Ninth Circuit remanded this matter in order to address the issue of whether the punitive damages
awarded by the jury were constitutionally excessive. See id. On April 10, 2014, a letter from
Plaintiff was filed in which Plaintiff requested that the Court set a case management conference in
light of the remand, and also requested that additional briefing be submitted in light of intervening
case authority.

26
27
28

The Court believes that it is appropriate to permit additional briefing on the issue of
whether the amount of the punitive damages award is constitutionally excessive. It appears to the

1

Court that a briefing schedule, as opposed to a full case management conference, is all that is

2

necessary in order to comply with the Ninth Circuit’s order. That being said, mandate has not yet

3

issued on the Ninth Circuit’s opinion. Once the Ninth Circuit issues its mandate, the Court will set

4

a briefing schedule at that time.

5
6
7

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.

time;1 and

8
9

Plaintiff’s request for a case management conference is DENIED without prejudice at this

2.

Once the Ninth Circuit issues its mandate, the Court will set a briefing schedule and a

10

hearing date in order to resolve the issue of whether the punitive damages awarded were

11

constitutionally excessive.

12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 11, 2014
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

11

Once the Ninth Circuit’s mandate issues, if Plaintiff believes that more than a briefing schedule is necessary, the
parties may file a new request that explains why a case management conference is necessary.

2