Waithaka v. Amazon.com Inc

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE BERNARD WAITHAKA, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, No. C19-01320-RSM 11 Plaintiff, ORDER RE: JOINT STATUS REPORT 12 v. AMAZON.COM, INC., AMAZON LOGISTICS, INC., Defendants.

This matter comes before the Court sua sponte and on parties’ joint status report dated April 1, 2021. Dkt. #94. On November 30, 2020, the Court stayed this matter pending the final resolution of Waithaka v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al. (1st Cir. No. 19-1848), or Rittmann v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al. (9th Cir. No. 19-35381), whichever occurred first. Dkt. #91. On March 17, 2021, Defendants Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon Logistics, Inc. (collectively, “Amazon”) filed a noticed advising that the U.S. Supreme Court denied their petition in Rittman. Dkt. #92 at 2 (citing Amazon.com, Inc. v. Rittmann, No. 20-622, 2021 WL 666403, at *1 (U.S. Feb. 22, 2021)). Accordingly, the conditions for lifting the stay in this matter have been met. See Dkt. #91 at 16.

1 Defendants now seek to extend the stay on the basis that the Supreme Court is likely to rule on their pending petition for writ of ceriotrari in Waithaka “in a matter of days following the April 16 conference.” Dkt. #94 at 2. Amazon also cites to another case, Saxon v. Sw.

Airlines Co., No. 19-3226, 2021 WL 1201367 (7th Cir. Mar. 31, 2021) as evidence of “further division between the circuits” that may increase the likelihood of the Supreme Court granting certiorari. Id. 8 For the second time, Amazon requests that this Court extend the stay pending final resolution of both Rittman and Waithaka. The Court previously denied Amazon’s request on the basis that “disposition of the Rittman petition directly implicates the probability that Waithaka will be granted, and visa versa . . . .” Dkt. #91 at 15. The Court finds that the Seventh Circuit’s recent decision in Saxon does not change its conclusion. While Saxon considers the holdings in Rittman and Waithaka, it does not appear to reject them. See generally Saxon, 2021 14 WL 1201367. This holding is consistent with Wallace v. Grubhub Holdings, Inc., which approvingly cited Waithaka and distinguished its facts without identifying any conflict. See 970 F.3d 798, 802, n.2 (7th Cir. 2020). Accordingly, the Court does not find Saxon sufficient basis to further delay this matter.

Lastly, even if the Court has erred in its reasoning and the Supreme Court grants certiorari in Waithaka, its mistake would be short-lived. See Dkt. #94 at 2 (Amazon contending that the Supreme Court will rule “in a matter of days” after April 16, 2021). Based on this short time span, the Court cannot find that Amazon would suffer substantial harm in the interim.

24 For the reasons set forth above, the Court ORDERS that the stay in this matter is lifted, effective immediately.

1 Dated this 7th day of April, 2021.

A RICARDO S. MARTINEZ 6 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE