Case 8:20-cv-00776-JLS-KES Document 55 Filed 08/15/22 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:1493

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 8:20-cv-00776-JLS-KES Date: August 15, 2022 Title: Nathan Christensen v. Carter's Retail, Inc. et al

Present: Honorable JOSEPHINE L. STATON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

V.R. Vallery N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:

Not Present Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE STAYED PENDING THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT’S DECISION IN ESTRADA V. ROYALTY CARPET MILLS,

(CAL. 2022)

On June 30, 2022, the Ninth Circuit held in Hamilton v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 2022) that it would be “inappropriate to allow federal courts to treat a freestanding manageability requirement as a dispositive consideration in PAGA cases” relying, in part, on the California Court of Appeal’s decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc.,

(2022). In Estrada, the California Court of Appeal held that courts do not “have inherent authority to strike unmanageable PAGA claims,” a holding opposite of that reached in Wesson v. Staples the Office Superstore, LLC,

(2021). Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc.,

, 697 (2022).

Just before the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Hamilton, the California Supreme Court granted the defendant’s petition for review in Estrada.

(Cal. 2022). Moreover, there is a pending Petition for Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc in Hamilton. See Hamilton v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Case No. 19-56161, Doc. 85. ______________________________________________________________________________ CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL 1 Case 8:20-cv-00776-JLS-KES Document 55 Filed 08/15/22 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:1494

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 8:20-cv-00776-JLS-KES Date: August 15, 2022 Title: Nathan Christensen v. Carter's Retail, Inc. et al Accordingly, the parties are ordered to show cause, in writing, why this matter should not be stayed pending the California Supreme Court’s decision in Estrada. The parties are directed to file their responses within five days of this Order’s issuance.

Initials of Deputy Clerk: vrv

______________________________________________________________________________ CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL 2