From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nachum v. M.U.S.A. Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 1, 2011
CV 11-03823 AHM (MANx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2011)

Opinion

CV 11-03823 AHM (MANx)

11-01-2011

MALI NACHUM v. M.U.S.A., INC., et al

Attorneys NOT Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys NOT Present for Defendants:


CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Present: The Honorable A. HOWARD MATZ, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

+-------------------------------------------------+ ¦Stephen Montes¦Not Reported ¦ ¦ +--------------+-------------------------+--------¦ ¦Deputy Clerk ¦Court Reporter / Recorder¦Tape No.¦ +-------------------------------------------------+

Attorneys NOT Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys NOT Present for Defendants:

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS (No Proceedings Held)

Defendant Avi Bienenfeld's motion to compel arbitration and to stay the case as to him is before the Court. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion.

Docket No. 20.

On September 27, 2011 the Court granted Defendants Oren and Darmon's motion to compel arbitration and to stay this case as to them. Docket No. 16. In that order, the Court directed the plaintiff and the remaining defendants to show cause as to why this case should not be stayed as to them as well.

In response to this Court's directive, Defendant Bienenfeld filed this motion to compel arbitration and to stay the case as to him as well. Docket No. 20. Plaintiff Nachum agrees that the case should be stayed as to Bienenfeld, but her response to the Court did not explain whether she opposes or consents to arbitration. Docket No. 21. Accordingly, on October 18, 2011 the Court ordered Plaintiff Nachum to file, no later than October 25, 2011, an agreement to arbitrate her claims against Defendant Bienenfeld or an opposition to Defendant Bienenfeld's motion to compel arbitration. Docket No. 22.

Plaintiff Nachum has failed to respond to the Court's order. "The failure to file any required paper, or the failure to file it within the deadline, may be deemed consent to the granting or denial of the motion." Local Rule 7-12. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Defendant Bienenfeld's motion to compel arbitration and to stay this case as to him.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


CV 11-03823 AHM (MANx)


Date November 1, 2011


MALI NACHUM

v.

M.U.S.A., INC., et al

The Court has stayed or dismissed this case as to all remaining defendants. The case is therefore stayed in its entirety pending the outcome of arbitration.

No hearing is required. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; Local Rule 7-15.

_______ : _______

Initials of Preparer SMO


Summaries of

Nachum v. M.U.S.A. Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 1, 2011
CV 11-03823 AHM (MANx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2011)
Case details for

Nachum v. M.U.S.A. Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MALI NACHUM v. M.U.S.A., INC., et al

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Nov 1, 2011

Citations

CV 11-03823 AHM (MANx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2011)