Bueno v. Bass Lake Joint Union Elementary School District

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAISY BUENO, individually and as Case No. 1:21-cv-00436-JLT-HBK guardian ad litem for S.B., a minor, 12 ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO Plaintiffs, STAY AND DIRECTING CLERK TO ENTER 13 v. STAY OF ENTIRE ACTION 14 BASS LAKES SCHOOL DISTRICT, (Doc. No. 74) 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 On December 17, 2024, the Court held a telephonic status conference at the request of the 19 Parties. (Doc. Nos. 71-73). The Parties advised that the five non-party depositions have been 20 concluded and all non-expert discovery has been completed. The Parties requested a stay and/or 21 further extensions to the remaining deadlines in the Case Management Scheduling Order so that 22 the Parties could participate in private mediation. Both Plaintiff and Bass Lakes School District 23 stated on the record their willingness to participate in good faith in private mediation and their 24 belief that a second mediation1 may prove successful to a resolution of this matter. 25 The court is vested with broad discretion to stay a case. Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 26 705 (1997) (citing Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936)). As a rule, “stays 27 1 The Parties previously participated in the Court’s VDRP, which resulted in a resolution of the pending 28 motion for attorney fees but otherwise resulted in an impasse. (Doc. No. 63). 1 | should not be indefinite in nature.” Dependable Highway Exp., Inc. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 498 2 | F.3d 1059, 1066-67 (9th Cir. 2007). Ifa stay is especially long or indefinite, a greater showing is 3 | required to justify it and the court must “balance the length of any stay against the strength of the 4 | justification given for it.” Yong v. LN.S., 208 F.3d 1116, 1119 (9th Cir. 2000). 5 The Court finds in its discretion that a stay of this action is appropriate and will stay this 6 | action so that the Parties may direct their resources and attention to private mediation. 7 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 8 1. The Parties’ joint motion to stay or continue the deadlines in the Case Management 9 Scheduling Order (Doc. No. 74) is GRANTED to the extent the Court STAYS this 10 action until March 31, 2025. 11 2. Within seven (7) days of the mediation’s conclusion or no later than March 31, 2025, 12 the Parties shall file a “Joint Post Mediation Status Report” regarding the result of the 13 mediation. 14 3. The substance of the mediation is confidential, and no party, lawyer, or other 15 participant may record, or without approval of the Court may disclose any event, 16 including any statement confirming or denying a fact—except settlement—that occurs 17 during the mediation. 18 4. Ifthe Parties reach a settlement at the mediation, a notice of settlement shall promptly 19 be filed with the Court. See Local Rule 160(a). Dispositional documents are due no 20 more than twenty-one (21) days from the filing of the notification, absent good 21 cause. See Local Rule 160(b). 22 5. Ifthe case does not settle, then the Parties shall include in their Joint Post Mediation 23 Status Report proposed deadlines for expert discovery, dispositive motions, pretrial 24 and trial dates. °° | Dated: _ December 17, 2024 Mihaw. fares Back 6 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE