Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-07067/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-07067-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MMCA GROUP, LTD.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C-06-7067 MMC

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

SECTION 1292(b) CERTIFICATION, TO

STAY ACTION PENDING APPEAL, AND

TO VACATE CURRENT DEADLINES;

VACATING HEARING

(Docket No. 115)

Before the Court is plaintiff MMCA Group, Ltd.’s (“MMCA”) motion to certify for

interlocutory appeal, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), the Court’s February 23, 2007 order

disqualifying MMCA’s prior counsel, to stay the instant action pending appeal, and to

vacate all current deadlines. Defendants Hewlett-Packard Company, Warren Rother, and

Robert Cozzolina (collectively, “HP”) have filed a single opposition. Defendants Pica

Corporation, Rodolfo Diaz, Kevin Hunsaker, and Luis Ortega each have filed separate

joinders in HP’s opposition. MMCA has filed a reply. Having considered the papers filed in

support of and in opposition to the motion, the Court finds the matter appropriate for

resolution without oral argument, see Civil L.R. 7-1(b), hereby VACATES the April 27, 2007

hearing, and finds as follows:

For the reasons set forth in HP’s opposition, the Court’s order of disqualification

does not “involve[ ] a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for

Case 3:06-cv-07067-MMC Document 135 Filed 04/18/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

difference of opinion,” see 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), and an immediate appeal therefrom will not

“materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation,” see id. 

Accordingly, MMCA’s motion is hereby DENIED.

This order terminates Docket No. 115.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 18, 2007 MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-07067-MMC Document 135 Filed 04/18/07 Page 2 of 2