Rahman v. Mott's LLP et al

Filing 125


Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 5 MOHAMMED RAHMAN, Case No. 13-cv-03482-SI Plaintiff, 6 v. 7 8 ORDER VACATING HEARING DATE; RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION MOTT'S LLP, Defendant. 9 Re: Dkt. No. 122 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 On December 1, 2017, plaintiff Mohammed Rahman filed a motion for reconsideration 12 with this Court. Dkt. No. 122. Plaintiff’s motion is based on the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in 13 Davidson v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation, 873 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir. 2017) (“Davidson”). The 14 parties have informed the Court that a petition for rehearing en banc in Davidson was filed on 15 November 3, 2017. The Ninth Circuit has yet to resolve the pending petition. 16 17 18 19 20 The Court finds that in the interests of judicial economy, the Court will consider the questions presented by plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration after the Ninth Circuit resolves the en banc petition. 1 Accordingly, the Court VACATES the January 17, 2018, hearing date and denies plaintiff’s motion without prejudice. Dkt. No. 122. The parties are instructed to contact the Court once a decision on the petition has been made. Once the petition has been denied, or has been granted and the case decided, the motion will be rescheduled. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: January 12, 2017 23 ______________________________________ SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge 24 25 26 27 1 28 Plaintiff opposes the request to delay the hearing pending the Ninth Circuit’s decision. Dkt. No. 124.

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?