Kalkbrenner v. Professional Bull Riders LLC
This text of Kalkbrenner v. Professional Bull Riders LLC (Kalkbrenner v. Professional Bull Riders 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.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 14 15 AT SEATTLE 16 17 TRACIE KALKBRENNER, 18 NO. 2:21-cv-0633-RSM 19 Plaintiff, 20 STIPULATED MOTION TO STAY 21 vs. PENDING ARBITRATION AND 22 ORDER 23 24 PROFESSIONAL BULL RIDERS, LLC., 25 26 Defendant. 27 28 29 30 31 32 I. RELIEF REQUESTED 33 34 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b), and Local Civil Rule 40(a), the parties jointly request an 35 36 order staying all matters and striking all interim deadlines in this case pending arbitration. 37 38 39 II. STATEMENT OF FACTS 40 41 Plaintiff filed this lawsuit against Defendant Professional Bull Riders, LLC (“Defendant” 42 43 or “PBR”) on May 12, 2021 (ECF No. 1). During her employment, Plaintiff signed an Arbitration 44 45 46 Agreement that Defendant alleges requires that her claims be heard in arbitration. 47 1 On September 9, 2020, Plaintiff alleges that she filed a charge of discrimination against 2 3 Defendant with the Nevada Equal Rights Commission (“NERC”). On February 16, 2021, Plaintiff 4 5 6 alleges that she received a Notice of Right to Sue from NERC. Plaintiff filed her Complaint on 7 8 May 12, 2021, Defendant was served on or about September 21, 2021. 9 10 On Friday July 9, 2021, the parties initially met and conferred regarding the procedural 11 12 posture of this matter and this Stipulated Motion. On or about October 12, 2021, Defendant 13 14 15 informed Plaintiff that it had agreed to stipulate to a stay of these proceedings. This Stipulated 16 17 Motion is warranted because a stay pending arbitration in this matter would halt all proceedings, 18 19 including Defendant’s need to file an Answer or other response. As such, a stay of all proceedings 20 21 22 is warranted. 23 24 III. AUTHORITY 25 26 Rule 6(b) provides that the Court may, for good cause, extend the time for any act that 27 28 29 may or must be done within a specified time. Local Civil Rule 40(a) also provides that the 30 31 Court may make such orders as might facilitate the prompt, inexpensive, and just disposition 32 33 of any action. It is well established that the Court possesses the inherent power to control its 34 35 own docket and calendar. 36 37 38 [A] trial court may, with propriety, find it is efficient for its own 39 docket and the fairest course for the parties to enter a stay of an 40 action before it, pending resolution of independent proceedings 41 which bear upon the case. This rule applies whether the separate 42 proceedings are judicial, administrative, or arbitral in character, and 43 does not require that the issues in such proceedings are necessarily 44 45 controlling of the action before the court. 46 47 1 Mediterranean Enterprises, Inc. v. Ssangyong Corp. 708 F.2d 1458, 1465 (9th Cir. 1983) 2 3 (citing Leyva v. Certified Grocers of California, Ltd., 593 F. 2d 857 (9th Cir. 1979)). 4 5 6 In addition, reliance upon an arbitration agreement to avoid immediate litigation is an 7 8 equitable defense. See, e.g., Schanferoke Coal & Supply Corp. v. Westchester Service Corp., 9 10 293 U.S. 449, 452, 55 S.Ct. 313, 314-15, 79 L.Ed. 583, 586-87 (1935); Wren v. Sletten 11 12 Construction Company, 654 F.2d 529, 533 (9th Cir. 1981); Danford v. Albert E. Schwabacher, 13 14 15 Jr., et al, 488 F.2d 454, 456 (9th Cir. 1973). 16 17 IV. MEMORANDUM OF FACTS & POINTS 18 19 The parties respectfully request that the Court exercise its discretion to stay the case and 20 21 22 strike all interim deadlines in order for this case to proceed through arbitration. Good cause exists 23 24 because a stay will provide the parties an opportunity to litigate this case in arbitration in 25 26 accordance with the arbitration agreement signed by Plaintiff. In addition, a stay of the litigation 27 28 29 and all associated deadlines will facilitate inexpensive disposition of the action after an arbitration 30 31 decision has been made. 32 33 / / / 34 35 / / / 36 37 38 / / / 39 40 / / / 41 42 / / / 43 44 45 / / / 46 47 1 V. CONCLUSION 2 3 For the aforementioned reasons, the parties respectfully request that this court stay all 4 5 6 deadlines in the instant case until the termination of arbitration. 7 8 9 10 Dated this 12th day of October, 2021. 11 12 /s/ Daniel Kalish______________ /s/ _Michael Griffin_____________ 13 14 Dan Kalish., WSBA # 35815 Michael Griffin 15 HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP Jackson Lewis P.C. 16 600 Stewart Street, Suite 901 520 Pike Street, Suite 2300 17 Seattle, WA 98101 Seattle, WA 98101 18 Telephone: 206-838-2504 Telephone: 206-626-6416 19 Fax: 206-260-3055 E-mail: Michael.Griffin@jacksonlewis.com 20 E-mail:mailto: dkalish@hkm.com Attorneys for Defendant Professional Bull 21 22 Attorneys for Plaintiff Tracie Kalkbrenner Riders, LLC 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
31 32 33
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 1 ORDER 2 3 PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. The Court stays this case and 4 5 6 strikes all interim deadlines while this case proceeds through arbitration. The parties are to 7 8 file a joint status report within 90 days of this Order, and every 90 days thereafter, advising 9 10 the Court as to the status of the arbitration. 11 12
13 14 DATED this 19th day of October 2021. 15 16 17 A 18 19 20 21 RICARDO S. MARTINEZ 22 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 3 4 I hereby declare that on October 12, 2021, I caused the foregoing document to be 5 6 served on the parties listed below in the manner indicated: 7 8 9 10 Michael Griffin Via U.S. 1st Class Mail 11 Jackson Lewis P.C. Via Hand Delivery 12 520 Pike Street, Suite 2300 Via Overnight Delivery 13 Seattle, WA 98101 14 Telephone: 206-626-6416 Via Facsimile 15 E-mail: Michael.Griffin@jacksonlewis.com 16 X Via Email 17 Attorneys for Defendant Professional Bull 18 Riders, LLC E-Service through ECF 19 20 21 22 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 23 24
25 26 /s/Daniel Kalish 27 Daniel Kalish 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Kalkbrenner v. Professional Bull Riders LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kalkbrenner-v-professional-bull-riders-llc-wawd-2021.