Anne Heiting v. Marriott International Inc.
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 26, 20242:23-cv-10822California489 words
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. 2:23-cv-10822-JLS-MAA Date: May 26, 2024 Title: Anne Heiting v. Marriot International, Inc., et al.
Present: Honorable JOSEPHINE L. STATON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Charles A. Rojas N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendant:
Not Present Not Present
PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS
ACTION SHOULD NOT BE STAYED
On May 14, 2024, the Ninth Circuit granted a rehearing en banc in the case Briskin v. Shopify, Inc., 2024 WL 2148754 (9th Cir. May 14, 2024.) Plaintiff filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority, identifying Shopify as a case that “Defendant cited exenstively in support of its motion [to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction].” (Notice at 2, Doc. 32.) Defendant responded, arguing that “pre-Shopify authority establish[es] that the Court lacks personal jurisdiction.” (Response at 2, Doc. 33.)