Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_02-cv-00583/USCOURTS-azd-2_02-cv-00583-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Labor/Mgmnt. Relations

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Susan A. Hudock,

Plaintiff,

v.

Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,

Defendant.

_________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CV-02-583-PHX-DGC

ORDER

On January 27, 2006, the Court entered a final judgment in this action in favor of

Defendant Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Doc. #182. On February 7, 2006, Plaintiff Susan

Hudock filed a notice of appeal and a motion for stay of judgment. Docs. ##184-85.

Plaintiff cites no legal authority in support of her motion. Nor does Plaintiff explain why she

seeks to stay the judgment in favor of Defendant. The Court accordingly will deny Plaintiff’s

motion.

Plaintiff has filed a notice indicating that she will not order any transcripts on appeal

and that the transcripts designated by Defendant are unnecessary. Doc. #192; see Doc. #190

(Def.’s Tr. Designation & Order Form); Ninth Circuit Rule 10-3.1. Plaintiff states that the

transcripts designated by Defendant are unnecessary because “the parties are already in

possession of any relevant transcripts largely due to the post-jury verdict motions that

[Plaintiff] filed in [this] Court.” Doc. #192 at 1. Plaintiff further states that she cannot afford

to pay for transcripts designated by Defendant. Id. at 2. Plaintiff, however, has not filed an

affidavit or provided any documentation regarding her financial condition.

Case 2:02-cv-00583-DGC Document 194 Filed 04/27/06 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 -

Defendant has filed a response to Plaintiff’s notice requesting that the Court require

Plaintiff to pay for the transcripts designated by Defendant. Doc. #193. Based on the record

before it, the Court cannot conclude that the transcripts designated by Defendant are

unnecessary to the appeal. Because the appellant ordinarily bears the costs of appeal, the

Court will require Plaintiff to pay for the transcripts designated by Defendant. See Doc.

#190; see also Ninth Circuit Rule 10-3.1(e)-(f); Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(3).

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for stay of judgment (Doc. #185) is denied.

2. Plaintiff shall make payment arrangements with the court reporter regarding

the transcripts designated by Defendant (Doc. #190) by May 12, 2006. 

DATED this 26th day of April, 2006.

Case 2:02-cv-00583-DGC Document 194 Filed 04/27/06 Page 2 of 2