Thompson et al v. PACCAR Incorporated et al

2:25-cv-00093Azd20 févr. 2026

Texte intégral

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Lila Thompson, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
PACCAR Incorporated, et al.,
Defendants.
No. CV-25-00093-PHX-KML
ORDER
The parties have stipulated to extend certain case management deadlines. (Doc.
120.) Good cause appearing, that stipulation is granted.
Non-party Lateshia EagleTail filed an “Emergency Motion for Stay Pending
Appeal.” (Doc. 123.) That motion appears to seek a stay of this case while EagleTail
appeals the denial of her earlier motion to intervene. As explained in the order denying
intervention, the current plaintiff Lila Thompson is a proper plaintiff under Arizona law
“and she is entitled to bring this suit on behalf of herself and all other beneficiaries.” (Doc.
104 at 3.) EagleTail’s current motion acknowledges likelihood of success on appeal is the
first factor when assessing a motion to stay. (Doc. 123 at 2.) In fact, a party seeking a stay
pending appeal must make “a strong showing that [she] is likely to succeed on the merits.”
Washington v. United States Dep’t of Educ., 161 F.4th 1136, 1139 (9th Cir. 2025)
(simplified). EagleTail does not present any meaningful arguments showing she is likely
to succeed on appeal. Her motion to stay is therefore denied.
EagleTail has now filed three motions to intervene (Doc. 71, 89, 102) and a motion
Case 2:25-cv-00093-KML Document 125 Filed 02/20/26 Page 1 of 2
- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
to stay pending appeal (Doc. 123). Arizona law makes clear EagleTail is not a proper
representative or a possible beneficiary. Therefore, EagleTail should not file additional
motions in this case.
IT IS ORDERED the Stipulation (Doc. 120) is GRANTED. The following
deadlines apply:
• The deadline for fact discovery, limited to the discovery of documents and
deposition testimony from the FBI, as described in the Touhy Request, is
May 1, 2026;
• The expert disclosure deadline for the party with the burden of proof is
April 6, 2026;
• The expert disclosure deadline for the responding party is June 8, 2026;
• The rebuttal expert disclosure deadline is July 6, 2026;
• The deadline for good faith settlement talks is June 22, 2026.
• All other deadlines, including the October 30, 2026, deadline for
dispositive motions, remain in place.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Motion for Stay (Doc. 123) is DENIED.
Dated this 20th day of February, 2026.
Case 2:25-cv-00093-KML Document 125 Filed 02/20/26 Page 2 of 2

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.