Sykes v. LivaNova Deutschland GMBH
1:17-cv-02437
D. Colo.Jan 4, 2018Background
- Plaintiffs Jon Sykes and Lynne Williams-Sykes sued LivaNova Deutschland GmbH and Sorin Group USA, Inc. in the District of Colorado (No. 17-cv-02437-KLM).
- Parties jointly moved to temporarily stay all proceedings and discovery while the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) considered consolidation and transfer to the District of South Carolina (hearing set for Jan. 25, 2018).
- The court evaluated whether a stay was appropriate under established factors used when dispositive or jurisdictional issues (or MDL transfer decisions) may resolve or move a case.
- The parties jointly requested the stay and identified no nonparty interests that would be affected.
- The court granted the temporary stay of discovery until the JPML rules, vacated the January 31, 2018 scheduling conference and related deadlines, and required the parties to notify the court within 10 days of the JPML decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether discovery and proceedings should be stayed pending the JPML decision on transfer/consolidation | A temporary stay is appropriate and requested jointly to avoid wasted effort while JPML decides transfer | A stay is appropriate (joined in the motion); no prejudice asserted | Court granted a temporary stay of discovery pending the JPML decision; scheduling conference and deadlines vacated |
Key Cases Cited
- Nankivil v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 216 F.R.D. 689 (M.D. Fla. 2003) (stay appropriate when resolution of preliminary issue may dispose of entire action)
- Good v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 5 F. Supp. 2d 804 (C.D. Cal. 1998) (courts frequently grant stays pending MDL panel decisions)
- Chavous v. D.C. Fin. Responsibility & Mgmt. Assistance Auth., 201 F.R.D. 1 (D.D.C. 2000) (staying discovery pending a decision that may fully resolve the case conserves resources)
- Vivid Techs., Inc. v. Am. Sci. & Eng’g, Inc., 200 F.3d 795 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (when a particular issue may be dispositive the court may stay discovery on other issues)
- Gilbert v. Ferry, 401 F.3d 411 (6th Cir. 2005) (ordering a stay of discovery is not an abuse of discretion when a defendant challenges subject-matter jurisdiction)