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

Filing 11

ORDER by Judge Thelton E. Henderson granting 10 Defendant's Motion to Stay. (tehlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2013)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4
BELLA DOCKS, et al.,
5

NO. C13-5109 TEH

Plaintiffs,
6

ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO
STAY

v.
7
8

BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB
COMPANY, et al.,

9

Defendants.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
Defendant Bristol-Myers Squibb Company has moved to stay all proceedings pending

12 potential transfer of this case to Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL”) Docket No. 2418, In re:
13 Plavix Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation (No. II), to which this
14 case was conditionally transferred on November 19, 2013. Upon careful consideration, the
15 Court finds that a stay is in the interests of judicial economy, and it does not appear that a
16 stay will cause prejudice to either party. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that
17 Defendant’s motion to stay is GRANTED. See Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254-55
18 (1936) (courts have inherent power to control their own dockets, including the power to stay
19 proceedings in the interests of judicial economy); In re Apple iPhone Application Litig., Case
20 No. 10-CV-05878-LHK, 2011 WL 2149102, at *2 (N.D. Cal. May 31, 2011) (factors courts
21 consider when weighing a stay include “(1) conserving judicial resources and avoiding
22 duplicative litigation; (2) hardship and inequity to the moving party if the action is not
23 stayed; and (3) potential prejudice to the non-moving party”).
24
25 IT IS SO ORDERED.
26
27 Dated: 11/20/13
28

THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT