Maita Distributors Inc. of San Mateo County v. DBI Beverage, Inc.

Filing 32

ORDER Following Hearing On 11 MOTION to Stay Arbitration, or in the Alternative, for a Preliminary Injunction. Signed by Judge Whyte on 7/10/09. (rmwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/10/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
ORDER FOLLOWING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STAY ARBITRATION OR FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION--No. C-09-02318 RMW TER

E-FILED on 7/10/09

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

MAITA DISTRIBUTORS, INC. OF SAN MATEO, a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. DBI BEVERAGE INC., a Tennessee corporation, Defendant.

No. C-09-02318 RMW ORDER FOLLOWING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STAY ARBITRATION OR FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [Re Docket No. 11]

Plaintiff's motion to stay arbitration or alternatively for preliminary injunction came on for hearing before the court on July 10, 2009. Plaintiff's motion raises significant questions regarding whether the underlying arbitration should proceed. At oral argument, however, it became apparent that the arbitration hearing is presently scheduled to commence on or after December 7, 2009. Thus, it appears that the issues raised by the present action may be resolvable on an expedited basis prior to the scheduled commencement of the arbitration. Accordingly, the parties are ordered to meet and confer to identify the issues that need to be resolved, discuss the scope and nature of any discovery that may be needed, and propose a schedule

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

by which these issues may be heard in November. The parties shall also meet and confer with counsel for MillerCoors, the prospective intervenor, regarding the prospective intervention. Finally, the parties shall confer regarding the extent to which whether this action should be coordinated with, or consolidated with, Mussetter v. DBI Beverage (C 09-03112), recently transferred from the Eastern District of California. The court will conduct a case management conference to address these issues, and any other case management issues that may arise, on July 17, 2009 at 10:30 a.m.

DATED:

7/10/09

RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge

ORDER FOLLOWING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STAY ARBITRATION OR FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION--No. C-09-02318 RMW TER 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Notice of this document has been electronically sent to: Counsel for Plaintiff: Craig S. Ritchey John G. Hursh [e-mail] [e-mail]

Counsel for Defendant: Elise Kathryn Sara Jonathan P. Hersey Mark Kenneth Slater [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

Counsel for Prospective Intervenor: Jesse Frank Ruiz [e-mail]

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel that have not registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program.

Dated:

7/10/09

TER Chambers of Judge Whyte

ORDER FOLLOWING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STAY ARBITRATION OR FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION--No. C-09-02318 RMW TER 3