Opinion
1:20-cv-00190-ADA-HBK
04-23-2023
MIYOSHI GARCIA, et. al. Plaintiffs, v. WESTLAND FARMS, LLC, et. al. Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING STAY AS TO PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS WESTLAND FAMRS LLC AND MADERA PERSIMMON GROWERS, INC.
(DOC. NO. 38)
HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pending before the Court is the joint motion to stay filed on behalf of Plaintiffs and Defendants Westland Farms LLC and Madera Persimmon Growers, Inc. (collectively, the “Parties”) on April 17, 2023. (Doc. No. 38). The Parties request that the Court stay this action, including all discovery and other deadlines due to fact that the Department of Industrial Relations Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (“DLSE”) recently served Defendant Madera Persimmon Growers, Inc. with a DLSE citation in connection with alleged wage and hour violations committed by Defendant M.G. Luna Inc. in this action. The Parties have agreed to have discussions and explore the possibility of meditation between the Parties and the DLSE. The Parties request a stay of this action during the course of these discussions in an effort to conserve judicial resources and permit the Parties to direct their resources toward a possible settlement.
Defendants Maria Guadalupe Luna and M.G. Luna, Inc. did not join in the motion to stay. A Clerk's entry of default was previously entered against Defendants Maria Guadalupe Luna and M.G. Luna, Inc. for failure to timely respond to the original complaint. (See Doc. No. 11).
The court is vested with broad discretion to stay a case. Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 705 (1997) (citing Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936)). The “party requesting a stay bears the burden of showing that the circumstances justify an exercise of that discretion.” Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 433-34 (2009). Generally, “stays should not be indefinite in nature.” Dependable Highway Exp., Inc. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 498 F.3d 1059, 1066-67 (9th Cir. 2007). If a stay is especially long or indefinite, a greater showing is required to justify it and the court must “balance the length of any stay against the strength of the justification given for it.” Yong v. I.N.S., 208 F.3d 1116, 1119 (9th Cir. 2000). The parties have met their burden to justify a stay of this action.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
1. The joint motion to stay filed on behalf of Plaintiffs and Defendants Westland Farms LLC and Madera Persimmon Growers, Inc. (collectively, the “Parties”) (Doc. No. 38) is GRANTED and this case is stayed only as to these Parties only until further order of Court.
2. The Parties shall file a joint status report every ninety (90) days to advise the Court of the status of settlement discussions with the Department of Industrial Relations Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (“DLSE”) and whether a further stay is warranted.