Bryant et al v. General Electric Company et al

Filing 30

ORDER by Judge Jeffrey S. White DENYING 29 Motion for Stay as MOOT and VACATING Case Management Conference. (jswlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/10/2009)

Case3:09-cv-02433-JSW Document29

Filed09/10/09 Page1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
ATTORNEYS AT LAW 222 RUSH LANDING ROAD P O BOX 6169 NOVATO, CALIFORNIA 94948-6169 [phone]

ALAN R. BRAYTON, ESQ., S.B. #73685 DAVID R. DONADIO, ESQ., S.B. #154436 FRANK J. ANDERS, ESQ., S.B. #227208 BRAYTON~PURCELL LLP Attorneys at Law 222 Rush Landing Road P.O. Box 6169 Novato, California 94948-6169 [phone] [phone] (Fax No.) Attorneys for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION VERNICE BRYANT, et al. Plaintiffs, vs. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, et al., Defendants ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. C09-2433-JSW JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING REGARDING TRANSFER TO ASBESTOS MDL #875 IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY VACATING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND DENYING STAY AS MOOT

BRAYTON~PURCELL LLP

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

Pursuant to Civil L. R. 7-11 and 7-12, the following parties hereby stipulate to, and respectfully move the Court for, an Order staying the deadlines and conference date set forth in the INITIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE ORDER filed on June 9, 2009 (Document 7), specifically, the Case Management Conference set for Friday, September 11, 2009 01:30 PM, for the following good cause: By action of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ("JPML") this action transferred to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on July 6, 2009, and is now before the Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno within Asbestos Multidistrict Litigation #875. ////

K:\Injured\104506\FED\Stip stay or cont (Byrant).wpd

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING REGARDING TRANSFER TO ASBESTOS MDL ­ C09-2433-JSW

1

Case3:09-cv-02433-JSW Document29

Filed09/10/09 Page2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a copy of the Order of the JPML, identified as "Conditional Transfer Order (CTO-323)". By operation of this order, the "condition" is lifted when no parties object to it and the order itself operates to become the `final' order. The attached copy is Document 28 of the docket of this case: It was posted today1. As CTO-323 specifies, jurisdiction transfers upon filing of the CTO with the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ­ not when it is filed with the Northern District of California. Counsel for Plaintiff alerted the Court and the parties of this same document, showing the stamp of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, by counsel's letter of July 23, 2009 (Document 22). The parties agree that this case is in the Asbestos MDL #875 and currently pending in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In fact, a case number was opened by the Clerk of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for this action on July 14, 2009. It was given case number C09-74747ER. (A photocopy of the docket from Pennsylvania is attached hereto for reference as Exhibit B.) The JPML has held that a district court has the authority to stay pending a transfer order. In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1348, 1349 n.1 (J.P.M.L. 2001) ("[T]hose courts concluding that such issues should be addressed by the transferee judge need not rule on them, and the process of 1407 transfer in MDL-875 can continue without any unnecessary interruption or delay.") The parties make this Motion on the grounds that a stay of this action would (a) promote judicial efficiency, (b) allow consistency in pretrial rulings, and (c) be most convenient to the parties. /// /// /// Rufino C. Santos, Court Services Supervisor of the Clerk's Office for the Northern District of California (415-522-2043) explained to staff for Plaintiffs counsel that the clerk's office was late in receiving a copy of CTO-323 from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and is only posting it today. K:\Injured\104506\FED\Stip stay or cont (Byrant).wpd 2
JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING REGARDING TRANSFER TO ASBESTOS MDL ­ C09-2433-JSW
1

Case3:09-cv-02433-JSW Document29

Filed09/10/09 Page3 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

For the reasons above, the parties hereby STIPULATE to and respectfully request the Court VACATE its Case Management Scheduling Order and that the Court issue an Order STAYING this action due to the action of the JPML Dated: September 10, 2009 BRAYTON~PURCELL LLP /s/ David R. Donadio By: __________________________ David R. Donadio Attorneys for Plaintiffs Dated: September 10, 2009 SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN & ARNOLD, LLP /s/ Marc Brainich By: __________________________ Marc Brainich Attorneys for Defendant GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY Dated: September 10, 2009 FILICE BROWN EASSA & MCLEOD, LLP /s/ Susan A. Ogdie By: __________________________ Susan A. Ogdie Attorneys for Defendant RAYTHEON COMPANY Dated: September 10, 2009 POND NORTH /s/ Mary Katherine Bedard By: __________________________ Mary Katherine Bedard Attorneys for Defendant UNISYS CORPORATION [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing date and deadlines specified in the INITIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE ORDER filed on June 9, 2009 (Document 7), specifically, the Case Management Conference set for Friday, September 11, 2009 at 1:30 PM, are hereby VACATED and that this action is STAYED due to the action of the JPML September 10, 2009 Dated: _____________________ The motion to stay is DENIED as the case has been transferred and is closed.
K:\Injured\104506\FED\Stip stay or cont (Byrant).wpd

_____________________________ Jeffery S. White United States District Judge 3

JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDING REGARDING TRANSFER TO ASBESTOS MDL ­ C09-2433-JSW