Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01506/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01506-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 

---

1

17-CV-1506 JLS (BLM)

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EXCEL CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION, 

INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED RENTALS (NORTH 

AMERICA), INC., and UNITED 

RENTALS, INC.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 17-CV-1506 JLS (BLM)

ORDER GRANTING JOINT 

MOTION TO STAY

(ECF No. 14)

Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Excel Concrete Construction, Inc. and 

Defendants United Rentals (North America), Inc. and United Rentals, Inc.’s (collectively 

“Parties”) Joint Motion to Stay Pending Mediation. (ECF No. 14.) The Parties represent 

that they have voluntarily agreed to mediate this litigation and the first available date for 

the Parties and their mediator is January 12, 2018. (Id. at 2.) The Parties request a ninety 

(90) day stay of the entire matter and propose to jointly report to the Court the results of 

the mediation. (Id.)

“District courts have inherent authority to stay proceedings before them.” Rohan ex 

rel. Gates v. Woodford, 334 F.3d 803, 817 (9th Cir. 2003), abrogated on other grounds by

Ryan v. Gonzales, 568 U.S. 57 (2013). “[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental to 

Case 3:17-cv-01506-JLS-BLM Document 16 Filed 10/18/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

17-CV-1506 JLS (BLM)

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

the power inherent in every court to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with 

economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 

299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936). In light of the foregoing, the Court finds that granting the 

requested stay would best promote the interests of securing a just, speedy, and inexpensive 

determination of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the 

Parties’ Joint Motion. This action is hereby STAYED for ninety (90) days from when this 

Order is electronically docketed. Accordingly, the Court VACATES all deadlines, 

including the hearing scheduled for November 2, 2017 on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, 

(ECF No. 10), until further order of the Court. The Parties SHALL FILE a joint status 

report on or before seven (7) days of the conclusion of this 90-day stay.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 18, 2017

Case 3:17-cv-01506-JLS-BLM Document 16 Filed 10/18/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2