Hamzeh
Hamzeh v. Pharmavite LLC
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 GUITY HAMZEH, Case No. 24-cv-00472-HSG
8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO STAY
9 v. Re: Dkt. No. 74 10 PHARMAVITE LLC, et al., 11 Defendants.
12 13 Pending before the Court is Defendants Pharmavite LLC and Nature Made Nutritional 14 Products’ (collectively, “Pharmavite”) motion to stay the proceedings and issue a protective order 15 staying discovery until the appeal in Bowler v. Nestlé Health Science, U.S., LLC is resolved by the 16 Ninth Circuit.1 Dkt. No. 74 (“Mot.”). For the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIES 17 Defendants’ motion. 18 I. LEGAL STANDARD 19 A district court’s “power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every 20 court to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for 21 itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936). To 22 determine whether a Landis stay is warranted, courts consider: (1) “the possible damage which…