Medina v. Barclays Bank Delaware
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- John A. Houston (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed the parties' failure to file a required status report following a granted motion to stay the case for arbitration. The court ordered the case to be administratively closed pending the final arbitration award.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Case administratively closed“In order to manage its docket, the Court HEREBY DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE this case pending a final award by the arbitrator.” | agree with court The court previously ordered the parties to file status reports. The order notes that no report regarding the commencement of arbitration was filed. Administrative closure is a standard docket management tool for cases stayed for arbitration, particularly when parties fail to provide updates. The decision follows from the procedural history recited in the order. |
The order itself: sound — The order is a brief procedural directive. It correctly identifies the prior order requiring status reports, notes the failure to comply, and applies a cited Ninth Circuit authority to support the administrative closure. The reasoning is sufficient for a docket management order.
Opinion
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 || ALFREDO MEDINA, Case No.: 3:23-cv-02209-JAH-DDL 12 Plaintit.) ORDER ADMINISTRATIVELY 13 || V. CLOSING CASE 14 || BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE, 15 Defendant. 16 On February 9, 2024, Plaintiff Alfredo Medina and Defendant Barclays Bank 17 || Delaware’s (the “Parties”) filed a joint motion to arbitrate this matter and stay the case. 18 ||(ECF No. 8). The Court granted the Parties joint motion and ordered the Parties to file a 19 || status report (1) within seven days after the commencement of arbitration proceedings, and 20 within seven days of the resolution of the arbitration proceedings. (ECF No. 9). To 21 no status report regarding the commencement of arbitration proceedings has been 22 filed. In order to manage its docket, the Court HEREBY DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court 23 ||to ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE this case pending a final award by the arbitrator. See 24 || Sarkar v. Garland, 39 F.4th 611, 618 (9th Cir. 2022). The Parties are to comply with the 25 ||Court’s conditions as set forth above. (See ECF No. 9). 26 || DATED: August 29, 2024 VU 27 A. HOUSTON 28 MITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE