Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01389/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01389-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114 Trademark Infringement

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UL LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

STURGEON SERVICES 

INTERNATIONAL, INC., a California 

corporation, ENGINEERED WELL 

SERVICES INTERNATIONAL, INC., a 

California corporation, JOHN POWELL, 

an individual, AND DOES 1-20, 

individuals,

Defendants.

No. 1:16-cv-01389-TLN-SAB

ORDER

AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS

Plaintiff UL LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action on September 19, 2016, against 

Defendants Sturgeon Services International, Inc., Engineered Well Services International, Inc., 

and John Powell (jointly “Defendants”). (Compl., ECF No. 1.) On November 14, 2016, 

Defendants Sturgeon Services International, Inc. and Engineered Well Services International, Inc. 

initiated a third-party complaint for indemnity and contribution against Rebecca Rynders aka 

Rebecca Shiyin Zhu. (See ECF No. 12.) Rebecca Rynders filed a Notice of Bankruptcy 

Case 1:16-cv-01389-TLN-SAB Document 32 Filed 01/05/17 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

Proceeding on December 22, 2016, seeking a stay of the instant action pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 

362. (ECF No. 28 at 2.) Plaintiff filed a response to Rynders’ notice on December 29, 2016. 

(ECF No. 29.) Plaintiff asserts that only the third-party cross-complaint filed against Rynders

may be stayed under 11 U.S.C. § 362 and cites Ingersoll-Rand Financial Corp. v. Miller Mining 

Co., Inc., 817 F. 2d 1424 (9th Cir. 1987), in support of this argument. (ECF No. 29 at 2.) 

In Ingersoll-Rand, the Ninth Circuit held that “[i]n the absence of special circumstances, 

stays pursuant to section 362(a) are limited to debtors and do not include non-bankrupt codefendants.” Id. at 1427. Plaintiff argues this reasoning should extend to Defendants in the 

instant matter who claim indemnity by Rynders. (ECF No. 29 at2.) The Court agrees. The 

parties do not assert, and the Court cannot find, any special circumstances that would permit the 

Court to extend the automatic stay to the entire proceeding, including claims Rynders is not a 

party to and the original complaint between Plaintiff and Defendants. While Rynders may be 

responsible for the indemnification of Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants, Defendants may 

assert their claim in the Bankruptcy action as an unsecured-claim after a judgment is entered in 

the instant action. See In re All Seasons Resorts, Inc., 79 B.R. 901, 904 (C.D. Cal. 1987) (finding 

that no threat of harm to reorganization plans existed where the party may pay the full amount of 

his claim and seek indemnification from debtor at a later date). Furthermore, Rynders has not 

presented the Court with evidence that the Bankruptcy Court extended the automatic stay to nondebtors in the instant action. See Federal Land Bank of Spokane v. Stiles, 700 F. Supp. 1060, 

1062–63 (D. Mont. 1988) (finding 11 U.S.C. § 105(a) does not extend the automatic stay to nodebtors where the bankruptcy court did not issue an order extending the stay). Accordingly, the 

instant action is STAYED only as to the cross-complaint against Rynders filed by Defendants 

Surgeon Services International, Inc. and Engineered Well Services International, Inc.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 4, 2017

Case 1:16-cv-01389-TLN-SAB Document 32 Filed 01/05/17 Page 2 of 2