Myles v. County of San Diego et al

Filing 459

ORDER granting 456 Motion to Stay. Briefing on Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs 445 is vacated.Signed by Judge John A. Houston on 12/02/2022. (lea)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11 MICKAIL MYLES, an individual,

ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION
[Doc. No. 456]

Plaintiff,

12
13

Case No. 3:15-cv-01985-JAH-BLM

v.

14 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, by and
through the SAN DIEGO COUNTY
15 SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, a public
entity; and DEPUTY J. BANKS, an
16 individual,
17

Defendants.

18
19

On November 14, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion for sanctions and attorney fees

20 and costs, (Doc. No. 445), and Defendants filed a motion for a new trial and a motion
21 for judgment as a matter of law, (Doc. Nos. 447, 448). On November 18, 2022, the
22 Court set a briefing schedule requiring the parties to respond to the other’s motion on
23 or before December 5, 2022. On November 30, 2022, Defendants filed an application
24 seeking an order continuing the briefing on Plaintiff’s motion until after the Court
25 issues an order on the motion for a new trial and motion for a judgment as a matter of
26
27
28
1

Case No. 3:15-cv-01985-JAH-BLM

1 law. 1 Defendants contend an order granting either of their motions will impact
2 Plaintiff’s motions for sanctions and fees. In the alternative, they seek an extended
3 briefing schedule on Plaintiff’s motion.
4

Plaintiff opposes the motion and argues it is frivolous to believe Defendant will

5 prevail on either of their pending motions, in light of the jury’s verdict. Plaintiff
6 further argues Defendants already received additional time to respond to the motion
7 through the Court’s briefing schedule.

Upon consideration of the motion and

8 Plaintiff’s response in opposition, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
9

1.

Defendants’ application is GRANTED;

10

2.

The briefing on Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions and attorney fees and

11 costs is VACATED to be rescheduled following the Court’s order addressing
12 Defendant’s motion for a new trial and motion for a judgment as a matter of law.
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14 DATED: December 2, 2022
15

_______________________________
THE HON. JOHN A. HOUSTON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Defendants originally filed an application seeking the same relief on November 28,
28 2022, which they later withdrew and filed the pending application.
1

2

Case No. 3:15-cv-01985-JAH-BLM