Silbaugh v. Federal Aviation Administration et al

Filing 77

STIPULATION AND ORDER re Parties' 76 Stipulated Motion to Stay Deadlines. This case is stayed. If the pending dispositive motion does not resolve the case, the parties will file a joint status report within thirty days of the date the Court issues an order on the dispositive motion and request a new trial date and pretrial deadlines. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (LH)

The Honorable Ricardo S. Martinez

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8
9
10
11

ALISHA SILBAUGH, an individual,
Plaintiff,
vs.
PETE BUTTIGIEG, Secretary of the
Department of Transportation,

12
Defendant.
13

) No.: 2:17-cv-01759-RSM
)
) STIPULATED MOTION AND ORDER TO
) STAY DEADLINES
)
)
) NOTED FOR CONSIDERATION:
) July 14, 2021
)
)
STIPULATION

14

Plaintiff Alisha Silbaugh and Defendant Pete Buttigieg, through their respective counsel,

15

hereby stipulate to stay the remaining case deadlines and the trial date until after the Court rules

16

on defendant’s pending motion for summary judgment, Dkt. #65. Defendant has moved for

17

summary judgment on all claims.

18

The court “has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to control

19

its own docket.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997); see also Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299

20

U.S. 248, 254 (1936). In determining whether to grant a motion to stay, “the competing interests

21

which will be affected by the granting or refusal to grant a stay must be weighed.” Lockyer v.

22

Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1110 (9th Cir. 2005) (citing CMAX, Inc. v. Hall, 300 F.2d 265, 268

23

(9th Cir. 1962)). Those interests include: (1) “the possible damage which may result from the

24

granting of a stay,” (2) “the hardship or inequity which a party may suffer in being required to go
STIPULATED MOTION
AND ORDER
2:17-cv-01759-RSM
Page 1

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
[phone]

1

forward, and (3) “the orderly course of justice measured in terms of the simplifying or

2

complicating of issues, proof, and questions of law which could be expected to result from a

3

stay.” Id.
In this case, the factors weigh in favor of granting the stay. Considering the first factor,

4
5

the parties do not anticipate that granting a stay will cause damage to either party. The second

6

factor favors a stay to conserve judicial resources and the parties’ resources. Pretrial deadlines

7

are quickly approaching, including the July 26, 2021 deadline for plaintiff to submit her pretrial

8

statement, the August 5, 2021 deadline for defendant to submit his pretrial statement, and the

9

August 9, 2021 deadline to file motions in limine. Those submissions will require significant

10

time and resources. The parties will face hardships if they are required to endure the expense

11

and burden of completing that work when the case may be resolved (or at least the issues

12

narrowed significantly) by the pending motion for summary judgment.
The third factor, the orderly course of justice and judicial economy, also weighs in favor

13
14

of a stay. Judicial economy will be furthered if the Court is not burdened by motions in limine

15

that may be unnecessary if the case is dismissed. In addition, the orderly course of justice will be

16

furthered if the parties know what, if any, issues remain for trial before preparing for trial,

17

drafting motions in limine, and drafting their pretrial statements.
Therefore, the parties request that the Court stay this case pending a ruling on defendant’s

18
19

motion for summary judgment. If the Court’s ruling on that motion does not resolve the case,

20

the parties will file a joint status report within 30 days after the Court issues its ruling to propose

21

a new trial date and pretrial deadlines.

22

//

23

//

24

//
STIPULATED MOTION
AND ORDER
2:17-cv-01759-RSM
Page 2

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
[phone]

1

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

2

DATED: July 14, 2021

Longshot Law, Inc.

3
s/ Chalmers Johnson
Chalmers Johnson, WSBA No. 40180
PO Box 1575
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
Phone: [phone]
Attorney for Plaintiff

4
5
6
7
8
DATED: July 14, 2021
9
10

TESSA M. GORMAN
Acting U.S. Attorney
s/ Sarah K. Morehead
s/ Heather C. Costanzo
SARAH K. MOREHEAD, WSBA #29680
HEATHER C. COSTANZO, FLBA #37378
Assistant United States Attorneys
United States Attorney’s Office
700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220
Seattle, WA 98101-1271
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
STIPULATED MOTION
AND ORDER
2:17-cv-01759-RSM
Page 3

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
[phone]

ORDER

1
2

IT IS SO ORDERED. This case is stayed. If the pending dispositive motion does not

3

resolve the case, the parties will file a joint status report within thirty days of the date the Court

4

issues an order on the dispositive motion and request a new trial date and pretrial deadlines.

5

DATED this 14th day of July, 2021.

6
7

A

8

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
STIPULATED MOTION
AND ORDER
2:17-cv-01759-RSM
Page 4

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
[phone]