Ridenhour
Bryant Vineyards Ltd v. Ridenhour
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 BRYANT VINEYARDS LTD, Case No. 19-cv-04363-EMC Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S EX
Vv. PARTE APPLICATION TO STAY LAUREN RIDENHOUR, Docket No. 46 Defendant.
The Winery has filed an ex parte application for a stay of this Court’s transfer order. As || the Winery acknowledges, “where a party seeks to stay a district court proceeding pending the || resolution of another action,” the party is asking for a Landis stay. Lal v. Capital One Fin. Corp., a No. 16-cv-06674-BLF, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9121, at *3-4 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2017); see also Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248 (1936). In the exercise of its discretion, see Lockyer v. Mirant || Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1109 (9th Cir. 2005) (noting that “[a] district court has discretionary power 19 || to stay proceedings in its own court under Landis’’), the ex parte application is DENIED. This order disposes of Docket…