IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN DIVISION No. 4:23-cv-00077-BO-BM ) FORMA AT INC., ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ORDER ) TWIC, INC., ) Defendant. ) ) On March 31, 2025, this Court ruled on two pending motions for partial summary judgment [DE 56]. Subsequently, the Court set a trial date of June 2, 2025 [DE 58]. On April 28, 2025, Defendant Twic moved [DE 59] for “clarification, reconsideration, and expedited briefing (or in the alternative stay)” of the Court’s ruling on the motions for summary judgment. In the wake of the Court’s ruling on the motions for summary judgment, the parties engaged in settlement discussions, which “resulted in Defendant realizing that Defendant and Plaintiff have very different understandings of the scope of [Plaintiff's] state law claims.” [DE 60 at 1]. The Defendant specifically requests that the Court “clarify whether Plaintiff's state unfair competition claims may be premised on trademark infringement or if the Court’s ruling that there is no likelihood of confusion resolved any trademark infringement portion of those claims” because “the parties cannot prepare for trial without clarification as to the scope of the state law claims.” [/d. at 2-3]. In furtherance of this, the Defendant requests that the Court order an expedited briefing schedule or stay the matter until the Court rules upon the pending motion for reconsideration. The authority of a court to order such abeyance is “incidental to the power inherent in every court to

control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. North Am. Co.,

(1936). Pursuant to the Court’s inherent authority to manage its docket, all proceedings in this case, including pre-trial briefing and trial, are hereby STAYED until the Court rules upon the pending motion for reconsideration [DE 59]. The Plaintiff may respond to the pending motion for reconsideration, and the Defendant may reply, within the time frame allotted by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

SO ORDERED, this_{ _ day of May 2025.

TE NCE W. BOYLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE