Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 26, 2021

Doe v. Twitter, Inc.

Judge
Joseph Spero
Docket
3:21-cv-00485
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In John Doe v. Twitter, Judge Spero certified an interlocutory appeal, granted a stay, and denied as moot Twitter’s request for more time to respond to discovery.

Who this affects

Twitter and the plaintiffs; the court certified an interlocutory appeal, granted a stay, vacated the scheduled hearing, and denied as moot Twitter’s request for more time to respond to discovery requests.

What happened

In John Doe, et al. v. Twitter, Inc., Twitter asked to seek reconsideration of an earlier order that partly denied its motion to dismiss or, alternatively, to appeal that order before the case ended. Twitter also asked to pause the case and to enlarge its time to respond to discovery requests.

The court granted certification for an immediate appeal, finding that the required legal conditions were met. It also granted Twitter’s motion for a stay and denied as moot the request for more time to respond to discovery. The court vacated the November 19, 2021 hearing and ordered the parties to report within 14 days after the appeal’s final resolution.

Judge Joseph C. Spero issued the order on October 26, 2021.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Doe v. Twitter, Inc. · No. 3:21-cv-00485
Judge
Joseph Spero
Date
Oct. 26, 2021

Background

Twitter asked for permission to file a motion asking the court to reconsider its August 19, 2021 order, which had denied in part Twitter’s motion to dismiss. Alternatively, Twitter asked the court to certify that order for an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), which permits certain appeals before the district-court case is over. Twitter also filed a motion to stay and an administrative motion to enlarge its time to respond to discovery requests.

Rulings

The court granted Twitter’s request to certify the earlier order for an interlocutory appeal. It found that the appeal involved a controlling legal question, that there was substantial disagreement about the answer, and that an immediate appeal could materially advance the end of the litigation.

The court also granted Twitter’s motion for a stay. It denied the administrative motion to enlarge the time to respond to discovery requests on the basis that the motion was moot. The court vacated the motion hearing scheduled for November 19, 2021 and ordered the parties to notify the court within 14 days after the appeal’s final resolution.

Effect of the Order

This order addressed appellate certification, the stay, and the discovery-related timing request. It did not itself decide whether Twitter’s earlier motion to dismiss should ultimately succeed. Judge Joseph C. Spero issued the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.