Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01321/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01321-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 385
Nature of Suit: Property Damage - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 15:2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH MICHAEL BALERO, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

LUMBER LIQUIDATORS, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-01005-JST 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART MOTION TO 

EXTEND TIME; SETTING CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Re: ECF No. 26

This case is one of twelve related cases concerning allegations that Defendant’s laminate 

flooring products fail to comply with standards governing the permissible levels of formaldehyde

in such products. Numerous other cases involving similar allegations have been filed across the 

country. The Plaintiffs in related case Conte v. Lumber Liquidators, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-01012-

JST, have filed a motion before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 1407, requesting the consolidation and transfer of all of these cases for pretrial 

proceedings. Declaration of William L. Stern, ECF No. 26-1 at ¶ 2. In light of the pendency of 

the proceedings before the JPML, Defendant has filed a motion to stay the deadlines in the abovecaptioned case, 15-cv-01005, until the JPML decides the transfer motion. ECF No. 26. Defendant 

has filed a similar motion in Conte at ECF No. 19.

“The pendency of a motion, order to show cause, conditional transfer order or conditional 

remand order before the Panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 does not affect or suspend orders and 

pretrial proceedings in any pending federal district court action and does not limit the pretrial 

jurisdiction of that court.” Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, Rule 2.1. Thus, “a district 

judge should not automatically stay discovery, postpone rulings on pending motions, or generally 

suspend further rulings upon a parties' motion to the MDL Panel for transfer and consolidation.” 

Case 3:15-cv-01321-JST Document 9 Filed 04/01/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Rivers v. Walt Disney Co., 980 F. Supp. 1358, 1360 (C.D. Cal. 1997). 

The Court concludes that a complete stay of all pretrial proceedings would not promote 

judicial economy. The Court’s continued management of these related cases during the pendency 

of the JPML’s consideration of the transfer motion would benefit a potential transferee court in the 

event that the consolidation and transfer motion is granted. The Court will retain the flexibility to 

stay only those matters that should await resolution of the JPML proceeding, while allowing other 

matters to move forward. For now, the Court will stay only the resolution of potentiallydispositive motions in these related cases, including the motion to dismiss at ECF No. 26, until the

JPML’s decision on the motion to transfer. 

The Court also hereby sets a case management conference in all related cases for April 28, 

2015 at 2:30 P.M. A single joint case management statement for all cases is due by April 21, 

2015. 

The Court notes that Balero Plaintiffs’ opposition to the motion to extend time indicates 

that the Plaintiffs seek an evidence preservation order. Any such request should first be the 

subject of a meet and confer. In the event the parties fail to stipulate to a protective order, the 

parties should state their respective positions in the joint case management statement and the 

Court will discuss the matter at the case management conference. The parties should also include 

in their statement any other issues they believe require this Court’s attention prior to the resolution 

of the JPML proceeding. 

The Court spreads this order to all cases related to 15-cv-01005. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 1, 2015

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-01321-JST Document 9 Filed 04/01/15 Page 2 of 2