Opinion
No. 3:11-cv-05192-MMC
11-18-2011
KEVIN FRAZIER, an individual; DEJESUS LIBRAN, an individual; on behalf of themselves and other persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. WIRELESS LIFESTYLE, INC.; and DOES 1 through 10, Defendant.
ANDREA M. KIMBALL (State Bar No. 196485) SNR DENTON US LLP MARIE LEGGON WRIGHTEN (State Bar No. 167221) VIRGINIA K. YOUNG (State Bar No. 174384) SNR DENTON US LLP Attorneys for Defendant WIRELESS LIFESTYLE, INC.
ANDREA M. KIMBALL (State Bar No. 196485)
SNR DENTON US LLP
MARIE LEGGON WRIGHTEN (State Bar No. 167221)
VIRGINIA K. YOUNG (State Bar No. 174384)
SNR DENTON US LLP
Attorneys for Defendant WIRELESS LIFESTYLE, INC.
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT WIRELESS LIFESTYLE, INC.'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TC (1) SHORTEN TIME ON MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS PENDING RESOLUTION OF MOTION TO TRANSFER TO MDL AND (2) MODIFY BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING DATE ON MOTION FOR REMAND TO STATE COURT
Judge Maxine M. Chesney
After considering the papers and evidence submitted in support of Defendant Wireless Lifestyle, Inc.'s ("Wireless Lifestyle") Administrative Motion to Modify Briefing Schedule and Hearing Date on (1) Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Resolution of Motion to Transfer to MDL and (2) Motion for Remand to State Court ("Administrative Motion"), the Court HEREBY GRANTS Wireless Lifestyle's Administrative Motion.
There is good cause for granting Wireless Lifestyle's Administrative Motion, as doing so will serve judicial economy, prevent prejudice to Wireless Lifestyle, eliminate the potential for conflicting pretrial rulings on issues common to the actions sought to be transferred to the MDL (including jurisdiction determinations), and ensure that the actions proceed in an orderly, coordinated fashion under the direction of the MDL court if they are transferred there. Any opposition brief to Defendant Wireless Lifestyle's Motion to Stay Action Pending Resolution of Motion to Transfer to MDL ("Stay Motion") will be due on November 30, 2011. Any reply brief in support of the Stay Motion will be due on December 7, 2011. The hearing on the Stay Motion will be on December 16, 2011 at 9:00 a.m.
The Court vacates the December 9, 2011 hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion for Remand and orders that no further briefs are due on Plaintiffs' Motion for Remand. If the Stay Motion is denied, the Court will set a briefing and hearing schedule on Plaintiffs' Motion for Remand.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Hon. Maxine M. Chesney
United States District Court Judge