Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-02219/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-02219-29/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

TRUE HEALTH CHIROPRACTIC INC, et 

al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

MCKESSON CORPORATION, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.13-cv-02219-HSG 

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' 

MOTION TO STAY

Re: Dkt. No. 208

On July 15, 2015, Defendants moved to stay the this action pending resolution of (1) 

McKesson’s Petition with the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) for retroactive 

waiver of opt-out notices for solicited faxes, and (2) the D.C. Circuit’s resolution of consolidated 

appeals of the FCC’s October 30, 2014 order. Dkt. No. 208. 

A court, in evaluating a motion to stay, must weigh the competing interests at stake. 

CMAX, Inc. v. Hall, 300 F.3d 265, 268 (9th Cir. 1962). Among the competing interests are: (1) the 

possible damage that may result from a stay; (2) the hardship or inequity a party may suffer by 

being required to proceed; and (3) the stay’s potential effect on the orderly course of justice, 

measured in terms of simplifying or complicating issues, proof, and questions of law. Lockyer v. 

Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1110 (9th Cir. 2005).

The first basis for the stay is moot. The FCC granted the petition for a retroactive waiver 

on August 28, 2015. See In the Matter of Rules & Regulations Implementing the Tel. Consumer 

Prot. Act of 1991, 30 F.C.C. Rcd. 8598, 8613 (2015). Moreover, having weighed the competing 

interests identified in Lockyer, the Court finds that on balance a stay pending resolution of the 

Case 4:13-cv-02219-HSG Document 267 Filed 09/27/16 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

appeals before the D.C. Circuit is not appropriate. The motion is denied. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

9/27/2016

Case 4:13-cv-02219-HSG Document 267 Filed 09/27/16 Page 2 of 2