Murdock v. Maybelline, LLC

Filing 13

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 4/9/2013 ORDERING that all proceedings, deadlines and discovery in this action are STAYED until after the JPML rules on the currently pending petition captioned In re: Maybelline New York and LOreal Paris Cosmetic Prods. Adver. Litig., MDL No. 2447. CASE STAYED. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4

FREDERICK B. WARDER III, (NY SBN 23724720)
Admitted pro hac vice
PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER LLP
1133 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

5
6
7
8
9

JAMES M. MATTESICH (SBN 54069)
MARC B. KOENIGSBERG (SBN 204265)
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
1201 K Street, Suite 1100
Sacramento, CA 95814-3938
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

10
11

Attorneys for Defendant
MAYBELLINE LLC

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

PATSY MURDOCK, Individually And On ) CASE NO. 2:13-CV-00207-JAM-EFB
Behalf Of All Others Similarly Situated,
)
)
Plaintiff,
) STIPULATED REQUEST TO STAY
) ACTION; ORDER
v.
)
)
MAYBELLINE, LLC,
) Judge: Hon. John A. Mendez
)
Defendants.
) Complaint Filed: February 1, 2013
) Trial Date:
None Set
)
___________________________________ )

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-1-

SAC 442330081v2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
STAY ACTION
Case No. 2:13-CV-00207-JAM-EFB

1

Plaintiff Patsy Murdock (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Maybelline LLC (“Defendant,”

2

and together with Plaintiff, the “Parties”) through their respective counsel hereby stipulate as

3

follows:

4

WHEREAS, Plaintiff served the Complaint in this action on February 1, 2013;

5

WHEREAS, Defendant served its Answer to the Complaint on March 22, 2013;

6

WHEREAS, three other cases involving allegations about the represented perfor-

7

mance of Defendant’s SuperStay lip and/or other cosmetic products and seeking monetary

8

and injunctive relief are pending against Defendant in three other judicial districts:

9

•

10
11

tember 26, 2012;
•

12
13
14

Leebove et al. v. Maybelline, LLC, No. 12-CV-7146 (S.D.N.Y.), filed on Sep-

Orshansky v. L’Oreal USA, Inc. et al., No. 12-CV-6342 (N.D. Cal.), filed on
December 14, 2012; and

•

Algarin v. Maybelline, LLC, Case No. 13-cv-00207 (AJB) (DHB) (S.D. Cal.),
filed December 18, 2012;

15

WHEREAS on March 22, 2013, Defendant filed a motion with the Judicial Panel on

16

Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to transfer this Murdock ac-

17

tion and the Orshansky and Algarin actions set forth above to the Southern District of New

18

York, where the first-filed Leebove action is pending and where all defendants are headquar-

19

tered, for coordinated MDL proceedings, In re: Maybelline New York and L’Oreal Paris

20

Cosmetic Prods. Adver. Litig., MDL No. 2447;

21
22
23
24

WHEREAS Plaintiff’s response to Defendant’s motion before the JPML is due on
April 15, 2013, and Defendant’s reply is due on April 22, 2013.
WHEREAS, the JPML may transfer this case to a different court for coordinated pretrial proceedings;

25

WHEREAS, to conserve the resources of the Court and the Parties, the Parties agree

26

that it is appropriate to stay this action until the JPML rules on the pending motion for trans-

27

fer and consolidation and that such a stay would promote the interests of justice;
-2-

28
SAC 442330081v2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
STAY ACTION
Case No. 2:13-CV-00207-JAM-EFB

1

WHEREAS, this Court has inherent power to stay proceedings in order to “control

2

the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for

3

counsel, and for litigants,” Landis v. North Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936);

4

WHEREAS, district courts routinely stay cases pending the JPML’s decision on a

5

motion for transfer in order to avoid the necessity of pretrial litigation that they may never

6

have to oversee if the transfer motion is granted. See Rivers v. Walt Disney Co., 980 F.

7

Supp. 1358, 1362 (C.D. Cal. 1997) (agreeing with “a majority of courts” that it is

8

“appropriate to stay preliminary pretrial proceedings while a motion to transfer and

9

consolidate is pending with the [JPML] because of the judicial resources that are

10

conserved”); see also Good v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 5 F. Supp. 2d 804, 809 (N.D. Cal.

11

1998) (“Courts frequently grant stays pending a decision by the [JPML] regarding whether

12

to transfer a case.”); and

13

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that, should the MDL motion be denied, the Parties

14

will promptly confer and file the Joint Status Report required by the Court’s February 4,

15

2013 Order Requiring Joint Status Report within fourteen (14) days of the denial.

16

///

17

///

18

///

19

///

20

///

21

///

22

///

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///
-3-

28
SAC 442330081v2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
STAY ACTION
Case No. 2:13-CV-00207-JAM-EFB

1

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED and requested by the Parties

2

through their respective attorneys of record that all proceedings, deadlines and discovery in

3

this action be stayed until after the JPML rules on the currently pending motion for transfer

4

and consolidation captioned In re: Maybelline New York and L’Oreal Paris Cosmetic Prods.

5

Adver. Litig., MDL No. 2447.

6

Dated:

April 8, 2013

SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN, MILLER
& SHAH, LLP

7
8

10

By:/s/Rose F. Luzon (authorized on 4/8/13)
Rose F. Luzon
James C. Shah
Natalie Finkelman Bennett

11

Attorneys for Plaintiff PATSY MURDOCK

9

12
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP

13
14

By:__/s/ Marc B. Koenigsberg
James M. Mattesich
Marc B. Koenigsberg
Attorneys for Defendant MAYBELLINE
LLC

15
16
17

ORDER

18

Good cause appearing therefor and pursuant to the Parties’ stipulation, it is hereby
19
ORDERED that all proceedings, deadlines and discovery in this action be stayed until after
20
the JPML rules on the currently pending petition captioned In re: Maybelline New York and
21
L’Oreal Paris Cosmetic Prods. Adver. Litig., MDL No. 2447.
22
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
23
24
25

DATED: April 9, 2013

26

/s/ John A. Mendez____________
JOHN A. MENDEZ
United States District Court Judge

27
-4-

28
SAC 442330081v2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
STAY ACTION
Case No. 2:13-CV-00207-JAM-EFB