Arnold et al v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company et al

Filing 26

ORDER by Judge Thelton E. Henderson denying 25 Defendant's Motion for order shortening time. (tehlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/6/2013)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4
5

MICHAEL A. ARNOLD, et al.,

6

Plaintiffs,

7
8

NO. C12-6426 TEH

v.

ORDER DENYING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR
ORDER SHORTENING TIME

BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB
COMPANY, et al.,

9
Defendants.
11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

On February 28, 2013, Defendant Bristol-Myers Squibb Company filed a motion to

13 stay proceedings pending possible transfer by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
14 and pending possible relation of this case by Judge Edward M. Chen to Caouette v.
15 Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Case No. 12-1814 EMC, and other cases pending before him.
16 Defendant also filed a motion for an order shortening time on the motion to stay but failed to
17 request any specific timeline. Plaintiffs filed neither an opposition nor a statement of non18 opposition to the request to shorten time.
19

Upon careful consideration, the Court does not find good cause to shorten time on

20 Defendant’s motion to stay. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to do so is DENIED.
21 However, the Court will not rule on Plaintiffs’ pending motion to remand until after it has
22 first considered the motion to stay.
23
24 IT IS SO ORDERED.
25
26 Dated: 03/06/13
27
28

THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT