Mendelson v. San Mateo County

Opinion

1 2 3 6 7 FELIX MENDELSON, Case No. 20-cv-05696-AGT 8 Plaintiff, 9 y. SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ORDER Re: Dkt. Nos. 11, 26 ll Defendant. 12 A stay of further proceedings in this case seems appropriate until the Ninth Circuit rules in 5 13 || Ralston v. County of San Mateo, 21-16489. That appeal is from a decision by Judge Chen in a case 14 || that shares many similarities with this one, except that in Ralston Judge Chen considered and applied 3 15 || Pakdel v. City and County of San Francisco, 141 S. Ct. 2226 (2021), an opinion issued while this a 16 || case was on appeal and which prompted the Ninth Circuit to remand here for reconsideration. 3 17 || Whether or not the Ninth Circuit agrees with Judge Chen’s application of Pakdel, the Circuit’s 18 |} analysis may influence—or even bind—this Court and impact how this case proceeds. To conserve 19 || the parties’ and judicial resources, a stay here therefore seems warranted. 20 The Court would like to consider the parties’ views. Are they in favor of a stay? If so or if 21 || not, why? Each side should submit a supplemental brief on this topic by February 11, 2022. If 22 || additional time is needed, the parties may stipulate to a reasonable extension of this deadline. 24 || Dated: January 31, 2022 25 | | 26 7 ALEX G.TSE United States Magistrate Judge 28