Free Order on Motion to Remand to State Court - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-02392-W-POR

Document 18

Filed 03/13/2008

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 BALL et. al. , vs. Plaintiffs, CASE NO. 07-CV-2392 W (POR) ORDER (1) DEFERRING RULING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO REMAND (Doc. No. 5), and (2) SUA SPONTE STAYING CASE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNION CARBIDE CORP. et. al., Defendants.

On December 20, 2007 Defendant Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation ("Foster Wheeler" or "Defendant") removed this case from the San Diego Superior Court to this Court. (Doc. No. 1.) On January 16, 2008 Plaintiff Reginald Ball ("Plaintiff") filed a motion to remand this case to state court. (Doc. No. 5.) Thereafter, on February 26, 2008, this Court received a Conditional Transfer Order ("CTO") from the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ("JPMDL") transferring this case to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. However, that order does not become effective until it is filed in the transferee court. See Rules of Procedure of the JPMDL, Rule 7.4(e). Before that happens, Plaintiff has fifteen days to file a notice of opposition to the transfer. See Rules of Procedure of the JPMDL, Rule 7.4(c). If Plaintiff files that notice, the JPMDL will refrain from sending the CTO to the transferee court, and will set the matter for hearing. See Rules of Procedure of the JPMDL, Rule 7.4(c)­(d).

-1-

07cv2392W

Case 3:07-cv-02392-W-POR

Document 18

Filed 03/13/2008

Page 2 of 3

1

"The general rule is for federal courts to defer ruling on pending motions to

2 remand in MDL litigation until after the JPMDL has transferred the case to the MDL 3 panel." Jackson v. Johnson & Johnson, Inc., No. 01-2113 DA, 2001 WL 34048067, at 4 *6 (W.D.Tenn. April 3, 2001). Accordingly, until the transfer issue is resolved, the 5 Court will defer ruling on Plaintiff's motion to remand. 6 In addition to deferring a ruling, this Court exercises its inherent power to stay 7 this case pending a final determination from the JPMDL on whether this case will be 8 transferred to the transferee court. As discussed in Rivers v. Walt Disney Co., 980 F. 9 Supp. 1358 (C.D. Cal. 1997), a district court has the inherent power to stay 10 proceedings. Id. at 1360. "This power to stay is `incidental to the power inherent in 11 every court to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time 12 and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.'" Id. (quoting Landis v. North 13 American Co., 229 U.S. 248, 254 (1936)); see also Leyva v. Certified Grocers of Cal., 14 Ltd., 593 F.2d 857, 863­864 (9th Cir. 1979) (trial court may stay matter pending 15 resolution of judicial administrative, or arbitral proceedings) (citations omitted). 16 In deciding whether to stay an action, a district court "must weight competing 17 interests and consider the effects of the stay on the Court's docket, on counsel and on 18 the litigants." Crown Central Petroleum Corp. v. Dep't of Energy, 102 F.R.D. 95, 98­99 19 (D. Md. 1984). Imposing a stay in this case will delay resolution of Plaintiff's motion to 20 remand, and it may delay the ultimate resolution of this case. However, it will also 21 preserve judicial resources, and avoid the possibility of conflicting rulings. It will also 22 conserve the parties' resources. By imposing a stay in this case, the parties may focus on 23 the issue of transfer, and depending on the outcome of that issue, tailor their motion to 24 remand, either to this Court or the transferee court. 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 ///
-207cv2392W

Case 3:07-cv-02392-W-POR

Document 18

Filed 03/13/2008

Page 3 of 3

1

For these reasons, the Court sua sponte stays this case pending a final

2 determination from the JPMDL on the issue of transfer. The parties shall immediately 3 notify the Court when this issue has been resolved. 4 5 6 7 8 DATED: March 13, 2008 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
-307cv2392W

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Hon. Thomas J. Whelan United States District Judge