UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
E.DIGITAL CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
CASE NO. 13-cv-2910-H-BGS
ORDER CONTINUING ALL
DEADLINES IN LIEU OF A
STAY
[Doc. No. 13]
vs.
WESTERN DIGITAL CORPORATION,
Defendant.
On December 6, 2013, Plaintiff e.Digital Corporation filed its complaint against
Defendant Western Digital Corporation. (Doc. No. 1.) On March 18, 2014, Plaintiff
filed a notice of settlement and unopposed, ex parte motion to stay all deadlines
pending settlement. (Doc. No. 13.) The parties request a stay until April 28, 2014 to
execute a settlement agreement and file a notice of voluntary dismissal. (See id. at 2.)
“The District Court has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its
power to control its own docket.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997).
Furthermore, “the suppliant for a stay must make out a clear case of hardship or
inequity in being required to go forward. . . .” Landis v. North Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248,
255 (1936); see also Lockyer v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1112 (9th Cir. 2005)
(quoting Landis and holding that “being required to defend a suit, without more, does
not constitute a ‘clear case of hardship or inequity’ within the meaning of Landis”).
- 1 - 13cv2910
Case 3:13-cv-02910-H-BGS Document 14 Filed 03/20/14 Page 1 of 2
In lieu of a formal stay, the Court orders a limited continuance of deadlines in
this action for the parties to effect settlement. An extension of the case deadlines for
forty days ensures that the proceedings will be delayed no longer than necessary.
Exercising its discretion, the Court denies the parties’ motion to stay the proceedings
and continues all deadlines until April 28, 2014.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: March 19, 2014
______________________________
MARILYN L. HUFF, District Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT