Uchenik v. McGraw Hill, LLC
- Denise Cote
- 1:20-cv-03162
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Uchenik v. McGraw Hill, Judge Cote stayed proceedings pending a multidistrict-transfer decision and required a status letter.
The stay affects Alexandra Uchenik, the defendants, Martha Barabas, and the proceedings in this case; the parties must submit a status letter by August 14, 2020.
What happened
In Uchenik v. McGraw Hill, Martha Barabas asked to join the case and move it to New Jersey, where she said she had filed a similar case. The defendants separately asked a federal panel to transfer this case and seven others to Delaware for coordinated proceedings.
The plaintiff and defendants asked the court to wait for the panel's decision before ruling on Barabas's request. The court concluded that the panel was best positioned to decide whether the related cases should be consolidated.
Judge Cote stayed the case until the panel decides the transfer request and ordered the parties to submit a status letter by August 14, 2020.
The detailed version
- Uchenik v. McGraw Hill, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-03162
- Denise Cote
- May 15, 2020
Background
Alexandra Uchenik brought this action against McGraw Hill, LLC, Pearson Education, Inc., Cengage Learning, Inc., and Educational Publishers Enforcement Group. The opinion states that the action was filed on April 22, 2020, and that Uchenik sued individually and on behalf of others similarly situated.
On April 30, Martha Barabas moved to intervene, meaning to join the case as a party. Barabas represented that she had previously filed a similar case in the District of New Jersey and asked to transfer this action there under 28 U.S.C. § 1404. Both Uchenik and the defendants opposed Barabas's motion.
On May 7, the defendants asked the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to transfer this case and seven other purportedly related cases to the District of Delaware under 28 U.S.C. § 1407. The panel's briefing was scheduled to be completed on June 4, and a hearing would likely be scheduled for July.
Court's Analysis
Uchenik and the defendants argued that the court should wait to decide Barabas's motion until the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation resolved the defendants' transfer request. The court explained that, in deciding whether to stay a case, it must consider the particular facts and the extent to which a stay would cause hardship, unfairness, or injustice to a party, the public, or the court.
The parties disagreed about which of three districts should handle the case: the defendants favored Delaware, Barabas favored New Jersey, and Uchenik favored the Southern District of New York. The court noted that Barabas's related cases in New Jersey had already been stayed pending the panel's decision.
Ruling
Judge Denise Cote ordered that proceedings in Uchenik v. McGraw Hill, LLC be stayed pending the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation's decision. The court also ordered the parties to submit a status letter by August 14, 2020. The order did not decide Barabas's motion to intervene, the requested transfer, or whether the cases should be consolidated.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.