Cave Man Kitchens Inc v. Caveman Foods, LLC

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Washington
DecidedFebruary 24, 2021
Docket2:18-cv-01274
StatusUnknown

This text of Cave Man Kitchens Inc v. Caveman Foods, LLC (Cave Man Kitchens Inc v. Caveman Foods, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cave Man Kitchens Inc v. Caveman Foods, LLC, (W.D. Wash. 2021).

Opinion

1 2 3

4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 6 AT SEATTLE 7 CAVE MAN KITCHENS INC, 8 Plaintiff, C18-1274 TSZ 9 v. MINUTE ORDER 10 CAVEMAN FOODS LLC, 11 Defendant. 12 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable 13 Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge: (1) The parties’ proposed judgment, docket no. 134, will not be entered by the 14 Court in its present form. The parties have provided no basis for the Court to make the certification required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) to enter partial judgment. 15 The parties’ stipulation proposes (i) dismissing without prejudice and expressly preserving Counts II, IV, VI, VII, and VIII of Defendant’s counterclaims “in the event . . . 16 Plaintiff’s claims survive appeal” and (ii) preserving the parties’ claims for costs, again contingent on the outcome of that appeal—which necessarily requires this Court to enter 17 judgment as to fewer than all claims. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); United States v. Gila Valley Irrigation Dist., 859 F.3d 789, 798 (9th Cir. 2017). The parties’ stipulation 18 attempts to “artificially ‘manufactur[e]’ finality” by keeping Defendant’s dismissed counterclaims “on ice while appeal [is being] taken from a partial judgment,” thereby 19 “circumventing the final judgment rule and arrogating to the parties [this Court’s] gatekeeping role.” James v. Price Stern Sloan, Inc., 283 F.3d 1064, 1066 (9th Cir. 2002). 20 The Court will entertain a renewed proposed judgment only after Defendant’s aforementioned counterclaims have been resolved, including by a stipulated voluntary 21 dismissal of such counterclaims, with or without prejudice, irrespective of the outcome of the appeal. 22 1 (2) The parties are DIRECTED to meet and confer and to file a Joint Status Report by Friday, March 5, 2021, indicating (i) whether Defendant’s remaining 2 counterclaims (Counts II, IV, VI, VII, and VIII) will be tried by the Court without a jury, (ii) when the parties will be prepared to proceed to trial, and (iii) whether the trial can be 3 conducted remotely via the ZoomGov.com platform. 4 (3) The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of record. 5 Dated this 24th day of February, 2021. 6 William M. McCool 7 Clerk 8 s/Gail Glass Deputy Clerk 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Cave Man Kitchens Inc v. Caveman Foods, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cave-man-kitchens-inc-v-caveman-foods-llc-wawd-2021.