Lopez v. Dave Inc.

Background

Krystal Lopez brought this action against Dave Inc. The court had previously denied Dave Inc.’s motion to require arbitration or, alternatively, dismiss the case for improper venue. Dave Inc. appealed that order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and the appeal was still pending when the parties filed their stipulation.

The court had previously stayed discovery concerning the class claims while allowing discovery concerning Lopez’s individual claims to continue. The parties later agreed to stay all proceedings in the district court and vacate the existing case deadlines while the appeal was pending. Those deadlines included the deadlines for a motion for class certification, the opposition and reply, and the class-certification hearing.

The Parties’ Disagreement

The parties disagreed about when the stay would end. Dave Inc. argued that the stay should continue until the Ninth Circuit issued its formal mandate after deciding the appeal. Lopez argued that the stay should end when the Ninth Circuit issued its decision. The parties agreed that any dispute about when the stay ended could be addressed through further briefing.

Order

Judge Vince Chhabria ordered that the action be stayed pending resolution of Dave Inc.’s appeal and that all deadlines be vacated. The order provides that the stay will be vacated seven days after the appeal concerning the order denying Dave Inc.’s arbitration or improper-venue motion is resolved, without prejudice to either party moving for further relief. If the parties dispute whether the appeal has been resolved, they must submit a joint letter addressing that issue under the court’s standing order.

This order concerns case management while an appeal is pending; it does not decide the underlying claims or the parties’ dispute over arbitration.