Miller Investment Trust v. KPMG
Filing
18
ORDER granting # 16 Joint Motion to STAY. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 1/8/2015. ( See pdf Order for specifics. ) (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM) Modified on 1/8/2015 to correct date (DRM).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
MILLER INVESTMENT TRUST and
JURA LIMITED,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
vs.
KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership,
Defendant.
03:14-cv-00133-LRH-VPC
MINUTE ORDER
January 8, 2015
PRESENT:
THE HONORABLE LARRY R. HICKS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
DEPUTY CLERK:
NONE APPEARING
REPORTER: NONE APPEARING
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF(S):
NONE APPEARING
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT(S):
NONE APPEARING
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS:
Before the court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Stay (#161 ) in which the parties seek a stay of
proceedings in this matter until the resolution of a case pending in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Massachusetts captioned Miller Investment Trust and Jura Limited v. Morgan Stanley &
Co., Inc. and KPMG, No 11-cv-12126-DPW (the “Massachusetts Action”).
It appearing that there is no purpose in requiring any status reports from counsel until the
Massachusetts Action has concluded, and Good Cause Appearing,
IT IS ORDERED that this case is STAYED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, for the convenience of the parties and the court’s
administrative purposes, this case will now be closed administratively. The closing of this case
administratively has no substantive effect on the status of the case. The case remains pending for all
substantive purposes. The case will be reopened administratively when either party notifies the court
that the Massachusetts Action has concluded. At that time, an updated joint status report shall be
filed with the request to reopen.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK
By:
1
Refers to the court’s docketing number.
/s/
Deputy Clerk
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?