1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ZIONS BANCORPORATION N.A., dba Case No.: 24-cv-02275-AJB-MMP CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST, a Utah 12 ORDER GRANTING JOINT Corporation,

MOTION TO REVISE BRIEFING

13

SCHEDULE AND ENTERING STAY

14 Plaintiff-in-Interpleader,

15 v. (Doc. Nos. 35, 37) 16 RMS CLOUD NORTH AMERICA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; 17 RMS NORTH AMERICA, LLC, a 18 Delaware limited liability company; and DOES 1 through10, inclusive, 19

20 Defendants-in-Interpleader.

21 RMS CLOUD NORTH AMERICA, LLC,

22 Defendant and Counterclaim and 23 Third-Party Claim Plaintiff, v. 24 RMS NA, INC., REZA PAYDAR and 25 ZIONS BANCORPORATION N.A., dba 26 CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST,

27 Counterclaim and Third-Party Defendants. 28 1 Two motions are before the Court. At the July 11, 2025, Early Neutral Evaluation, 2 Plaintiff-in-Interpleader and Counterclaim Defendant, Zions Bancorporation N.A., dba 3 California Bank & Trust (“CB&T”), Defendant-in-Interpleader and Third-Party Plaintiff, 4 RMS Cloud North America, LLC (“RMS Cloud”), and Third-Party Defendants RMS NA, 5 Inc. (“RMS NA”), and Reza Paydar (“Paydar”) (collectively, “the Parties”), jointly moved 6 to stay this interpleader action (“Joint Motion to Stay”) (Doc. No. 37), until the Court rules 7 on two pending motions to dismiss (Doc. Nos. 70; 71) in the related action, RMS NA, Inc. 8 v. RMS (AUS) PTY LTD et al., Case No. 24-cv-01366 (S.D. Cal. filed August 1, 2024) 9 (“RMS v. RMS”). On July 11, 2025, the Parties also filed a Joint Stipulation and Motion to 10 Revise Briefing Schedule on CB&T’s Motion to Deposit Funds and for Judgment in 11 Interpleader (“Joint Stipulation”). (Doc No. 35.) 12 I. Joint Motion to Stay the Action (Doc. No. 37) 13 “A trial court may, with propriety, find it is efficient for its own docket and the fairest 14 course for the parties to enter a stay of an action before it, pending resolution of 15 independent proceedings which bear upon the case.” Leyva v. Certified Grocers of 16 California, Ltd., 593 F.2d 857, 863 (9th Cir. 1979). Because this interpleader action 17 depends in part on the outcome of the two pending motions to dismiss in RMS v. RMS, the 18 Court finds that any possible damage, hardship, or inequity in issuing the stay to be 19 minimal, and that issuing a stay would simplify the issues before the Court in this action. 20 See In re PG&E Corp. Sec. Litig., 100 F.4th 1076, 1085 (9th Cir. 2024). Accordingly, the 21 Joint Motion to Stay is GRANTED. 22 II. Joint Stipulation and Motion to Revise Briefing Schedule (Doc. No. 35) 23 In the Parties’ Joint Stipulation, the Parties state that they will file a stipulation 24 settling the issues raised by CB&T’s Motion to Deposit Funds and For Judgment in 25 Interpleader (“CB&T’s Motion”) (Doc. No. 25) by August 1, 2025. (See Doc. No. 35 ¶ 3.) 26 The Parties request that the deadlines for RMS Cloud, Paydar, and RMS NA to respond to 27 CB&T’s Motion and the hearing in relation to CB&T’s Motion be held in abeyance until 28 the Parties have filed their stipulation. For good cause shown, the Parties’ Joint Stipulation | |}is GRANTED. If the parties do not file a stipulation settling the subject of CB&T’s Motion 2 August 1, 2025, and if the case is no longer stayed pending resolution of the two motions 3 || to dismiss in RMS v. RMS, the Court will re-issue a briefing schedule as to CB&T’s Motion. 4 5 ISSO ORDERED. 6 || Dated: July 14, 2025 □

8 United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28