Young

Young v. Shoe Palace Corporation

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJuly 2, 20213:21-cv-00559California4,283 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SARAH YOUNG, Case No.: 21CV559-GPC(MSB)

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

v. MOTION TO STAY

SHOE PALACE CORPORATION, [Dkt. No. 3.] Defendant. 16 Before the Court is Defendant’s motion to stay this case pending conclusion of Katt v. Shoe Palace Corporation, Case No. 1:19cv3676-RBJ, D. Colo (filed Dec. 26, 2019), a case pending in the District Court for the District of Colorado. (Dkt. No. 3.) Plaintiff filed an opposition and Defendant replied1. (Dkt. Nos. 5, 6.) Based on the reasoning below, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion to stay proceedings. / / / 23 24 1 In its reply, Defendant argues for the first time that the Court should decline supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Civil Rights Act claim. (Dkt. No. 6 at 3-7.) “It is improper for a moving party to introduce new facts or different legal arguments in the reply brief than those presented in the moving papers.” United States…

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.