- 1 -

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

JOHN DAVIS, §

§

 Plaintiff, §

§

v. § Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-00970-O

§

INGA DOW, et al., §

§

 Defendant. §

ORDER

Before the Court are Defendant Inga Dow’s Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or 

Otherwise Respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 17), filed December 28, 2022; Defendant 

Inga Dow’s Motion to Consolidate and Stay (ECF No. 20), filed January 6, 2023; Defendant Inga 

Dow’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 22), filed January 6, 2023; and Defendants Keller Williams

Realty, Inc., Gary Keller, and Josh Team’s Motion to Consolidate and Extend Deadline to Answer 

or Otherwise Respond to Complaint (ECF No. 25), filed January 9, 2023.

These motions arise from the competing deadlines and interests of the various parties in

this case. The matters presented are further complicated by the fact that a parallel case is currently 

pending, but stayed, before Judge Pittman in the Fort Worth Division of the United States District 

Court for the Nothern District of Texas. See Inga Dow v. Keller Williams Realty, Inc., John Davis, 

GO Management, LLC, David Osborn, Smokey Garrett, and Gary Keller (the “Dow Case”), Civil 

Action No. 4:21-cv-01209-P (N.D. Tex.).

To begin, Defendant Inga Dow’s Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise 

Respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 17) is MOOT, given that she has timely filed her 

Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 22).

Case 4:22-cv-00970-O Document 30 Filed 01/25/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID 538
- 2 -

As for the motions to consolidate (ECF Nos. 20, 25), the Court finds that they should both 

be DENIED. Importantly, consolidation under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) is 

discretionary, as the parties correctly identify in their briefing. Having reviewed the briefing 

submitted by the parties, and considered the status of the Dow Case, the Court finds that the instant 

action should be allowed to continue in the present format. The Court’s reasoning is based on two

related rationales. 

First, Plaintiff John Davis has not been afforded relief in the Dow Case, nor will he be 

afforded relief any time soon. Reviewing the docket in the Dow Case, John Davis has had a motion 

to dismiss pending in that matter, in one form or another, since January 6, 2022. This has precluded 

him from filing an answer or counterclaims in that litigation. Moreover, any decision on his motion 

to dismiss has been indefinitely stayed pending the results of an arbitration that he is not even a 

participant in. And based on the most recent arbitration status update in the Dow Case from 

December 1, 2022, it seems that a final arbitration hearing has not yet been set, thus making any 

resolution months—if not years—away. See December 1, 2022 Joint Status Report, Dow Case, 

ECF No. 125. Second, this case, the Dow Case, and the Dow arbitration will all depend on the 

resolution of several key factual issues, which this Court is prepared to resolve in an expedited 

manner. This will in turn conserve judicial resources by elimating the need for duplicative 

proceedings that have already stretched on for years. Therefore, in its discretion and not finding 

good cause to grant Defendants’ motions to consolidate, the Court DENIES both motions to 

consolidate (ECF Nos. 20, 25).

Based on this determination, Defendants Keller Williams Realty, Inc., Gary Keller, and 

Josh Team SHALL file their answer or other responsive pleading by February 8, 2023.

SO ORDERED on this 25th of January, 2023.

Case 4:22-cv-00970-O Document 30 Filed 01/25/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID 539