California Expanded Metal Products Company et al v. James Klein et al

Filing 217

ORDER ADOPTING 215 , 216 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The court ADOPTS the two report and recommendations in their entirety, DENIES the Non-Parties' motion to stay, and GRANTS in part Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file an overlength brief. Plaintiffs' motion and any opposition shall not exceed 30 pages, and any reply shall not exceed 15 pages. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (LH)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9
10
11

CALIFORNIA EXPANDED
METAL PRODUCTS COMPANY,
et al.,

12
v.

JAMES A. KLEIN, et al.,
Defendants.

15
16

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiffs,

13
14

CASE NO. C18-0659JLR

Before the court are two report and recommendations issued by Special Master

17

Mark Walters on (1) non-parties Seal4Safti, Inc. (“S4S”), SteelTec Supply, Inc., Jaroslaw

18

Sydry, and Leszek Orszulak’s (collectively, “Non-Parties”) motion to stay discovery and

19

motion practice pending the outcome of a related case in the Central District of California

20

(1st R&R (Dkt. # 215); see also Not. of Related Case (Dkt. # 194)); and (2) Plaintiffs

21

California Expanded Metal Products Company and Clarkwestern Dietrich Building

22

Systems LLC’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) motion for leave to file an overlength brief (2d

ORDER - 1

1

R&R (Dkt. # 216)). The Non-Parties request an order staying any further discovery or

2

motion practice relating to them until the lawsuit brought by S4S challenging the validity

3

of the underlying patents is resolved. (1st R&R at 2-3); see Seal4Safti, Inc. v. California

4

Expanded Metal Prods. Co., No. 2:20-cv-10409-JFW-PD (C.D. Cal. 2020). Plaintiffs

5

request 35 pages for their brief seeking to add the Non-Parties to the contempt

6

proceedings. (2d R&R at 1.)

7

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 53(f), the court must decide de novo

8

all objections to the findings of fact or conclusions of law made or recommended by a

9

special master. Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(f)(3)-(4). Here, no party objects to either of Mr.

10

Walters’s recommendations. (See Dkt.; see also 1st R&R at 8 (allowing parties to file

11

objections, if any, within ten days); 2d R&R at 2 (same).) The court has reviewed Mr.

12

Walters’s report and recommendations in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil

13

Procedure 53(f), the relevant portions of the record, and the applicable law. Having done

14

so, the court finds Mr. Walters’s reasoning persuasive and independently reaches the

15

same conclusions for the reasons articulated by Mr. Walters. Accordingly, the court

16

ADOPTS the two report and recommendations in their entirety (Dkt. ## 215, 216),

17

DENIES the Non-Parties’ motion to stay, and GRANTS in part Plaintiffs’ motion for

18

//

19

//

20

//

21

//

22

//

ORDER - 2

1

leave to file an overlength brief. Plaintiffs’ motion and any opposition shall not exceed

2

30 pages, and any reply shall not exceed 15 pages.

3

Dated this 14th day of May, 2021.

4
5

A

6

JAMES L. ROBART
United States District Judge

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

ORDER - 3