Hawthorne v. Umpqua Bank

Filing 52

ORDER RE: JULY 10, 2013 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. Briefing or Stipulation due by 7/22/2013. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on July 10, 2013. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/10/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 AMBER HAWTHORNE, et al., Case No. 11-cv-06700-JST Plaintiffs, 11 ORDER RE: JULY 10, 2013 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE United States District Court Northern District of California v. 12 13 UMPQUA BANK, Defendant. 14 15 As discussed at today’s Case Management Conference, Defendant Umpqua Bank’s 16 17 pending Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, ECF No. 40, requests that the Court enter 18 judgment on part, but not all, of Plaintiffs’ Fifth Cause of Action for violation of California’s 19 Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq. Neither the motion nor the opposition addresses whether a motion for judgment on the 20 21 pleadings gives the Court the power to enter judgment on less than an entire cause of action. 22 Unlike Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, Rule 12(c) does not explicitly provide for that relief. Accordingly, and as discussed at the Conference, by July 22, 2013, the parties shall submit 23 24 either: (1) competing briefs, not longer than eight pages, addressing the foregoing question; or 25 (2) a stipulated request for leave to file a Second Amended Complaint that separates Plaintiffs’ 26 UCL cause of action into at least three separate causes of action. 27 /// 28 /// 1 2 3 4 Umpqua’s motion will be deemed submitted at that time, unless the Court schedules the matter for further hearing. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 10, 2013 5 6 7 ______________________________________ JON S. TIGAR United States District Judge 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?