Bauer v. Mailroom Personnel

The Honorable RICHARD A. JONES 2 The Honorable Magistrate S. KATE VAUGHAN

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE ADAM BAUER, et al., NO. C21-0453 RAJ-SKV 10 Plaintiffs, STIPULATED MOTION AND 11 v. [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY PRETRIAL DEADLINES WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS NOTE FOR: May 11, 2022 MONROE CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX MAILROOM PERSONNEL, et al., 15 Defendants.

16 I. STIPULATED MOTION 17 Pursuant to LCR 7(d)(1) and LCR 10(g), the parties respectfully submit this stipulated motion to stay the deadlines in the operative case scheduling order as detailed in this stipulated motion, to facilitate settlement negotiations.

20 A court’s power to stay proceedings is incidental to the inherent power to control the disposition of its cases in the interests of efficiency and fairness to the court, counsel, and litigants. Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254–55 (1936). In determining whether a stay is appropriate, a district court “must weigh competing interests and maintain an even balance.” Id. These competing interests include the possible damage resulting from granting a stay, the hardship or inequity a party may suffer if required to go forward, and the simplifying or complicating of issues, proof, and questions of law that could result from a stay. CMAX, Inc. v. 2 Hall, 300 F.2d 265, 268 (9th Cir. 1962) (citing Landis, 299 U.S. at 254–55).

3 The parties agree that a stay of the proceedings is appropriate and jointly move this Court to enter such. The parties continue to engage in a settlement negotiation process, and this is taking time while the parties draft and exchange proposals, each of which must be reviewed and evaluated by the opposing party or parties with their respective counsel. However, deadlines in the case continue to approach, including the deadline to file motions related to discovery on May 12, 2022. To focus their efforts more efficiently on these ongoing settlement negotiations, the parties request a stay of the operative pretrial deadlines. Neither party believes the stay will cause any prejudice.

11 A stay, as opposed to merely extending the pretrial deadlines, will allow flexibility with the timing for the parties to exchange proposals. If and when it becomes necessary, the parties will request the stay be lifted, at which time the parties will submit a new proposed case schedule.

14 The parties jointly agree to file monthly joint status reports with the Court to keep the Court apprised of the status and progress of settlement negotiations. For example, the parties could submit a joint status report by the 15th of each month (excluding May 2022) or, if that day // // // // // // // // // // falls on a weekend or a federal U.S. holiday, the following business day. The parties therefore respectfully request the Court to find good cause to enter a stay of all pretrial deadlines.

3 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 11th day of May, 2022.

5 s/ Daniel A. Fiedler s/ Katherine J. Faber Davis Wright Tremaine LLP Katherine J. Faber, WSBA #49726 Bruce E.H. Johnson, WSBA #7667 Michelle M. Young, WSBA #52423 Caesar D. Kalinowski, WSBA #52650 Assistant Attorneys General Daniel A. Fiedler, WSBA #56436 Corrections Division Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300 P.O. Box 40116 Seattle, WA 98104-1610 Olympia, WA 98504-0116 Telephone: 360 Telephone: 206-622-3150 586-1445 Fax: 260-757-7700 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Defendants Attorneys for Plaintiffs 1 II. [PROPOSED] ORDER The Court has considered the parties’ stipulation, and for good cause shown, the Court approves the parties’ stipulation and Orders as follows: 1. The stipulated motion to stay pretrial deadlines is GRANTED; 2. The parties are directed to file joint status reports with the Court by the 15th of each month (excluding May 2022) or, if that day falls on a weekend or a federal U.S. holiday, by the following business day.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 16th day of May, 2022.

12 A S. KATE VAUGHAN United States Magistrate Judge