Medina v. Barclays Bank Delaware

District Court, S.D. California·Decided August 29, 2024·No. 3:23-cv-02209·Unknown

Opinion

I ALFREDO MEDINA, Case No.: 3:23-cv-02209-JAH-DDL Plaintit.) ORDER ADMINISTRATIVELY V. CLOSING CASE BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE, Defendant. On February 9, 2024, Plaintiff Alfredo Medina and Defendant Barclays Bank Delaware’s (the “Parties”) filed a joint motion to arbitrate this matter and stay the case. (ECF No. 8). The Court granted the Parties joint motion and ordered the Parties to file a status report (1) within seven days after the commencement of arbitration proceedings, and within seven days of the resolution of the arbitration proceedings. (ECF No. 9). To no status report regarding the commencement of arbitration proceedings has been filed. In order to manage its docket, the Court HEREBY DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE this case pending a final award by the arbitrator. See Sarkar v. Garland, 39 F.4th 611, 618 (9th Cir. 2022). The Parties are to comply with the Court’s conditions as set forth above. (See ECF No. 9). DATED: August 29, 2024 VU A. HOUSTON MITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

Medina v. Barclays Bank Delaware, (S.D. Cal. 2024).

Medina v. Barclays Bank Delaware (Medina v. Barclays Bank Delaware) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Atm Magfoor Rahman Sarkar v. Merrick Garland
39 F.4th 611 (Ninth Circuit, 2022)