Bui v. Sprint Corporation, et al

Filing 32

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/6/2015 DENYING 28 Ex Parte Application to Stay Mediation. (Michel, G.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

VIET BUI, individually and on behalf of
all other similarly situated employees, and
on behalf of the general public,

No. 2:14-cv-02461-TLN-AC

13
Plaintiffs,

ORDER

14
v.
15
16
17
18
19

SPRINT CORPORATION, a SPRINT
COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P.,
a Delaware Corporation;
SPRINT/UNITED MANAGEMENT CO.,
a Delaware Corporation; and DOES 1
through 20, inclusive,
Defendants.

20
21
22
23

The Court has reviewed the Proposed Intervenors’ Ex Parte Application to stay the

24

mediation that the Bui Parties have scheduled for March 9, 2015, until after the Court issues an

25

order on Proposed Intervenors’ Motion, currently before the Court. (ECF No. 28.) The Court has

26

also reviewed both Plaintiff and Defendant’s Oppositions. (ECF No. 30-31.) At this time the

27

Court notes that neither of the classes, in the instant action Bui or in the Guilbaud, et al. v. Sprint

28

Nextel Corp. and Sprint/United Management Co., Inc. case, have been certified. The Court finds
1

1
2

that staying the mediation is inappropriate at this time. Thus, the Proposed Intervenors’ Ex Parte
Application is DENIED.

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5
6

Dated: March 6, 2015

7
8
9
10

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2