Opinion
2:23-cv-01727-RSL
01-17-2024
STEVEN HORN, Plaintiff, v. AMAZON.COM, INC., Defendant.
ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR RESPONSE
Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge
This matter comes before the Court on “Amazon's Motion to Extend Responsive Pleading Deadline.” Dkt. # 16. Having reviewed the memoranda, declarations, and exhibit submitted by the parties, the Court finds that there is good cause to extend the response deadline until after the Court determines whether this matter should be stayed. Doing so will ensure that the benefits of the requested stay - such as the avoidance of briefing and argument regarding an issue that is currently before the Ninth Circuit - are not lost. Plaintiff's concern that this extension is actually an indefinite stay that will harm class members is not persuasive. Unless and until a stay issues, the parties are required to make their initial disclosures and participate in a Rule 26(f) conference on the schedule established by the Court, Dkt. # 12, and discovery will commence pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(d)(1). A delay in defendant's filing a motion to dismiss will not prejudice plaintiff or the class.
For all of the foregoing reasons, defendant's motion to extend the deadline to respond to the complaint is GRANTED. If the Court grants the pending motion to stay, the response will be due after the stay is lifted. If the Court declines to stay the case, defendant must respond within 14 days of the Court's order.