Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01633/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01633-24/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 740
Nature of Suit: Railway Labor Act
Cause of Action: 45:151 Railway Labor 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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Don Addington; John Bostic; Mark

Burman; Afshin Iranpour; Roger Velez;

Steve Wargocki,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

US Airline Pilots Association; US

Airways, Inc.,

Defendants. __________________________________ Don Addington; John Bostic; Mark

Burman; Afshin Iranpour; Roger Velez;

Steve Wargocki, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

vs.

Steven Bradford; Paul Diorio; Robert

Frear; Mark King; Douglas Mowery; John

Stephan, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 08-1633-PHX-NVW

(consolidated)

ORDER

CV08-1728-PHX-NVW

Before the Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees (doc. # 600)

and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint (doc. # 620). On

February 9, 2010, the counsel for all parties participated in a status conference with the

Court regarding whether to stay proceedings in this Court pending the current appeal in

the Ninth Circuit. The Court took the issue under advisement, set oral argument on

pending motions on attorneys’ fees and dismissal tentatively for February 24, 2010, and

indicated it would issue its ruling on a stay shortly. (Doc. # 634.) This is that ruling.

Case 2:08-cv-01633-NVW Document 637 Filed 02/12/10 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 -

On July 23, 2009, USAPA filed a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit from the

Partial Judgment and Permanent Injunction (doc. # 594) filed July 17, 2009, and sought

an expeditious hearing. (Doc. # 595.) The Ninth Circuit processed USAPA’s appeal

expeditiously and heard oral argument on December 8, 2009. The Ninth Circuit likely

will also render its rulings on the appeal expeditiously.

The parties agree that if the Ninth Circuit reverses the July 17, 2009 partial

judgment and permanent injunction, the pending motions will be moot, and staying

proceedings will have had no adverse effect on Plaintiffs. If the Ninth Circuit affirms the

partial judgment in favor of Plaintiffs, a stay will have delayed resolution of Plaintiffs’

claims for attorneys’ fees and individual damages for the length of the stay. Defendants

seek a stay of one to three months. However, the Ninth Circuit may make rulings on the

appeal that should be considered in deciding the pending motions to ensure that the

Court’s rulings are consistent with the Ninth Circuit’s rulings. Weighing these competing

legitimate interests, the Court concludes that it is likely that a decision on appeal will be

made expeditiously and that the net balance of fairness and economy to all parties favors

a stay of the pending motions and of the case until then.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees

(doc. # 600), Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint (doc. # 620), the

proceedings in this Court are stayed pending decision of the appeal of the July 17, 2009

partial judgment and permanent injunction in the Ninth Circuit, Case No. 09-16564, or until

further order of this Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the oral argument on Plaintiffs’ Motion for

Award of Attorneys’ Fees (doc. # 600) and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Second Amended

Complaint (doc. # 620) set for February 24, 2010.

DATED this 11th day of February, 2010.

Case 2:08-cv-01633-NVW Document 637 Filed 02/12/10 Page 2 of 2