Opinion
2:20-cv-00953-KJM-DB
12-02-2021
Amalgamated Transit Union, International, et al., Plaintiffs, v. United States Department of Labor, et al., Defendants, And Cross-Claims.
ORDER
The court has reviewed the parties' joint report, ECF No. 68, the State of California's unopposed motion for leave to file a supplemental pleading in the form of a cross-complaint, ECF No. 69, and the Amalgamated Transit Union's (ATU's) unopposed motion to intervene as a defendant to California's proposed cross-complaint, ECF No. 71. The court orders as follows:
(1) California's motion to file a cross-complaint is granted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 13(g) (governing cross-claims), 15(d) (governing supplemental pleadings); Keith v. Volpe, 858 F.2d 467, 473 (9th Cir. 1988) (“Rule 15(d) is intended to give district courts broad discretion in allowing supplemental pleadings.”); State of California v. U.S. Dep't of Lab., 155 F.Supp.3d 1089, 1098-99 (E.D. Cal. 2016) (granting similar motion in related matter). The proposed cross-complaint and exhibits at ECF Nos. 70-1, 70-2, 70-3, and 70-4 are deemed filed.
(2) ATU's motion to intervene is granted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(2) (“On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who . . . claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.”).
(3) The court approves the parties' proposal that the United States Department of Labor and the Secretary of Labor, to whom the parties refer as the “federal defendants, ” and ATU be relieved of any obligation to file an answer to California's cross-complaint, provided that California agree not to argue the federal defendants or ATU have defaulted or waived any rights. See Joint Report ¶ 4.
(4) The pending cross-motions for summary judgment by ATU and California are held in abeyance without prejudice to ATU's or California's right to request that these cross-motions be restored to calendar and set for oral argument.
(5) The parties' request for leave to exceed page limits in their respective briefing on California's motion to stay implementation of the Department of Labor's October 28, 2021 determination is granted as proposed in paragraph 7 of the parties' joint report.
(6) The court will schedule further proceedings after ruling on California's motion to stay implementation.
This order resolves ECF Nos. 69 and 71.
IT IS SO ORDERED.