Smith v. Pizza Hut, Inc.

Filing 196

ORDER denying 192 Motion to Stay Briefing on Conditional Certification as premature by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 5/2/2011.(erv, ) (Modified on 5/3/2011 corrected typing errors)(erv, ).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland
Civil Action No. 09-cv-01632-CMA-BNB
MARK SMITH, individually and on behalf
of other similarly situated persons,
Plaintiff,
v.
PIZZA HUT, INC.,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
This matter arises on Pizza Hut’s Motion and Memorandum of Law for a
Temporary Stay of Briefing on Conditional Certification Pursuant to the Scheduling Order
and In the Interests of Economy and Fairness [Doc. # 192, filed 4/21/2011] (the “Motion re
Response”). The plaintiff opposes the motion arguing, among other things, that it is premature
because the plaintiff has not moved for conditional certification. Plaintiffs’ Response in
Opposition [Doc. # 195, filed 5/2/2011] (the “Response”).
A motion similar to the Motion re Response was filed in a companion case-- Darrow v.
WKRP Management, LLC, 09-cv-01613-CMA-BNB. I granted that motion. Significantly,
however, the plaintiff in Darrow had filed a motion for conditional certification. No such motion
has been filed here. I agree with the plaintiff that a ruling on the Motion re Response, prior to
the plaintiff seeking conditional certification, is premature.

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion re Response [Doc. # 192] is DENIED as premature.
Dated May 2, 2011.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge

2