Anne Heiting v. Marriott International Inc.

Good Law
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.)

There is certainly other case law in the Ninth Circuit that applies the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.