Baker Farming Company, LLC v. United States

Opinion

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BAKER FARMING COMPANY, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-01120-KES-SAB 11 Plaintiff, ORDER CONTINUING STAY AND 12 SETTING DEADLINE v. 13 (ECF No. 17) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 14 Defendants. 15 16 Before the Court is the parties’ stipulated motion to continue the stay in this case until 17 December 5, 2025 in light of a pending settlement agreement. The parties proffer they will 18 endeavor to file dispositional documents by December 5, 2025; however, if they are not able to 19 at that time, the parties propose filing a status report by November 21, 2025. 20 A district court “has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to 21 control its own docket.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997), citing Landis v. North 22 America Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936). A stay is discretionary and the “party requesting a stay 23 bears the burden of showing that the circumstances justify an exercise of that discretion.” Nken 24 v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 433-34 (2009). “Generally, stays should not be indefinite in nature.” 25 Dependable Highway Exp., Inc. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 498 F.3d 1059, 1066-67 (9th Cir. 2007). 26 Instead, district courts should “balance the length of any stay against the strength of the 27 justification given for it.” Young v. I.N.S., 208 F.3d 1116, 1119 (9th Cir. 2000) (discussing that if a stay is especially long or its term is indefinite, a greater showing is required to justify it). 1 Upon review of the motion and the file in this case, the Court finds good cause exists to 2 | continue the stay. Since the parties’ initial request to stay this action on May 21, 2025, the final 3 | governmental decisionmaker has approved the agreement to resolve this case. Accordingly, the 4 | only remaining issue is execution of the terms of the settlement. The parties proffer the United 5 | States has forwarded the terms of the approved agreement to the IRS. Pursuant to the approved 6 | agreement, the IRS must make adjustments in their data system. After the IRS makes necessary 7 | adjustments in their data system, the Parties will execute the remaining terms of the agreement 8 | and file a dispositive pleading. (ECF No. 17 at 2.) 9 As the parties were previously advised, the Court will not approve an indefinite stay. The 10 | Court will, as the parties’ request, require that they either file dispositional documents by 11 | December 5, 2025, or a status report with an accompanying request, supported by good cause, to 12 | continue the stay no later than November 21, 2025. 13 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is STAYED through December 14 2025. The parties shall have through December 5, 2025, to file dispositional documents. 15 | However, if the parties will not be able to file dispositional documents by December 5, 2025, the 16 | parties shall file a status report with an accompanying request, supported by good cause, to 17 | continue the stay in this matter by November 21, 2025. 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. OF. nf ee 20 | Dated: _ August 13, 2025 _ OO STANLEY A. BOONE 21 United States Magistrate Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27 28