Vahora v. Valley Diagnostics Laboratory Inc. et al

Filing 176

ORDER RE PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 9/2/2019. (Kusamura, W)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

GULAMNABI VAHORA,

10
11
12

ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST
FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE

Plaintiff,

8
9

Case No. 1:16-cv-01624-SKO

v.
(Doc. 174)
VALLEY DIAGNOSTICS LABORATORY,
INC., et al.,
Defendants.
_____________________________________/

13
ORDER

14
15

On May 17, 2019, a jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiff and judgment was entered

16 on May 21, 2019. (Docs. 152, 153.) On June 4, 2019, Defendants filed post-trial motions. (Docs.
17 155, 156.) Defendant Naeem Qarni filed a notice of bankruptcy filing on June 21, 2019, and the
18 Court vacated the hearing on the post-trial motions and directed the parties to brief the issue of
19 whether the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) would apply to stay this case. (See Docs. 162,
20 163, 165.)
21

On August 27, 2019, Plaintiff filed a request for judicial notice attaching an order entered in

22 Naeem Qarni’s bankruptcy case, case number 19-12679 in the United States Bankruptcy Court for
23 the Eastern District of California, ruling on a motion for relief from the automatic stay. (Doc. 174.)
24 The bankruptcy court’s order, in relevant part, states as follows:
25
26
27
28

The Motion is granted-in-part, hereby lifting the automatic stay prospectively to the
debtor Naeem Qarni, to allow completion through final judgment of the pending
federal district court action against the debtor Naeem Qarni and Valley Diagnostics
Laboratory, Inc., Case No. 1:16-cv-01624-SKO. The movant may file, defend, and

litigate any post-judgment motions or appeals in the action, Case No. 1:16-cv-01624SKO.

1
2

(Doc. 174 at 6.)

3
The Court takes judicial notice of the contents of the bankruptcy court’s order. See Reyn’s

4
5

Pasta Bella, LLC v. Visa USA, Inc. 442 F.3d 741, 746 n.9 (9th Cir. 2006). The bankruptcy court

6 having granted relief from the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) to allow this case to proceed
7 to finality, the post-trial motions will proceed.
8
9

Having reviewed preliminarily the papers filed in connection with the post-trial motions,
(Docs. 155, 156), the Court finds the matters suitable for decision without oral argument pursuant

10
to Local Rule 230(g). Accordingly, the hearing on the motions will not be set, and a written
11
12

decision will issue as soon as is practicable.

13
14 IT IS SO ORDERED.
15
16

Dated:

September 2, 2019

/s/

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

.